Conquer Club

Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby thegreekdog on Thu May 10, 2012 4:55 pm

natty dread wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
natty dread wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
natty dread wrote:
My definition is "everyone should be free to do whatever as long as it causes no harm to others or impede their respective freedoms".

But hey, I guess you know what I think better than I? After all, you have so much more experience being me than I do...


I'm not really sure that's your definition.


Oh, ok! So you do know what my definitions are better than me. How fascinating! Do tell me, how long have you been me? 30 years? 31?

I'm just going by the general tenor of your posts in the forum. You seem to be rather judgmental of others, regardless of whether their doing whatever does not cause other people to be harmed.


I'm only judgemental of actions and attitudes which go against said principle.

And regardless of that, my statement of personal opinion about any certain activity does not count as trying to impede on other people's freedom. My freedom of expression does not impede on other people's freedom to whatever, ergo I am allowed to criticize ideas and concepts, as long as I'm not doing it in a derogatory, dehumanizing or silencing/marginalizing way.

But as always, good luck providing some evidence for your claims.


Ah, you're not impeding others by being judgmental. I get it. I think Phatscotty is also allowed to criticize ideas and concepts, as long as he's not doing it in a derogatory, dehumanizing, or silencing/marginalizing way too.

I suppose some could read your posts (and mine and Phatscotty's) as derogatory or marginalizing. Which, frankly, doesn't impede anyone from posting their beliefs or opinion, but, seem to fall under your definition of impeding. In sum, I'm not sure how Phatscotty's posts are any different than yours in the way they criticize or opine on current events with respect to whether they impede or don't impede someone's point of view. Phatscotty offers a point of view. You offer a point of view. I offer a point of view. Phatscotty's point of view does not impede your ability (or anyone else's) to do or say anything, just like your point of view does not impede Phatscotty's ability to do or say anything.

Example - Your idea of equal rights for women may be very different from my idea of equal rights for women. Does that mean your idea of equal rights for women is "people should be free to do the things I think people should do?"
Example - Your idea of freedom of religion may be very different than my idea of freedom of religion. Does that mean your idea of freedom of religion is "people should be free to do the things I think people should do?"


Oh, so your argument is basically the good old "if you're intolerant of intolerance, then you're just as bad as the intolerant people"... gotcha.


When the person who is being intolerant of intolerance is also the one defining intolerance, then yes.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby Phatscotty on Thu May 10, 2012 6:27 pm

MeDeFe wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses, yearning to breath free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest tossed,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.

And then have some cops who're drunk on power and authority beat them to death.


Oops, I forget the last line on the Statue of Liberty.

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses, yearning to breath free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest tossed,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.
No, I will not follow your orders
Start punchin pig


fixed
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby Phatscotty on Thu May 10, 2012 6:31 pm

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:
show: Phatsotty nonsense


Soo... are you serious? A guy mouths off slightly (remember this guy is schizophrenic), and this in your mind justifies the initiation of force against him by an authority? This is arrest worthy? I'm seriously confused as to what you consider freedom when we can't even talk freely without fear of violence against us. In his situation, he should've been able to tell the cops to f*ck off. They hassled him because he was homeless and crazy.

Does your grade school mentality towards petty words extend to us regular folks? Are you justified in killing a person for calling you the douche you are?

I posted the photo so you could see what you're supporting, that if a schizophrenic homeless man dares to stand up for himself he should be killed. Off with his head, huh? If you think that makes it an appeal to emotion, then you've got some issues.

Get real, Phatty. The pigs went that far because he didn't want to deal with their shit, and let me tell you from experience there's nothing worse that cops can't stand- disrespect. There is absolutely no excuse for what happened.

Like I said, you have a warped sense of freedom. Maybe one day you'll see the pigs for what they really are. I hope for your sake that you aren't on the wrong end of a nightstick.

greekdog wrote:And PS - I don't understand how you can be supportive of this type of thing and call yourself a Libertarian or Ron Paul supporter or small government conservative. This is exactly the kind of thing that you should be railing against.


Precisely. Here he is, complaining in another thread about how Obama is supporting a nanny state gov't that will decide everything for you, and yet he supports killer cops.

-TG


Remember, cops don't know people are schizophrenic upon the first 2 minutes of confronting him. Can you please stop putting the 20/20 hinsight as magically supposed to have been known by the police....talk about nonsense....check your own premise pal
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby Phatscotty on Thu May 10, 2012 6:32 pm

natty dread wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
natty dread wrote:
Phatscotty wrote: This guy should have been receiving some kind of assistance.


You mean government handouts / entitlements?

Le gasp!


We take care of the mentally ill. That has been decided since our founding. It goes along with things we all agree is a primary function of government, such as defense and a courts system.


Le gasp! dork


Oh, but shouldn't those mentally ill people just be taken care of by their relatives or some charities or such?


Obviously, the more options, the better. sad I have to point out something so simple to you.
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby Phatscotty on Thu May 10, 2012 6:34 pm

natty dread wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
natty dread wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
natty dread wrote:
My definition is "everyone should be free to do whatever as long as it causes no harm to others or impede their respective freedoms".

But hey, I guess you know what I think better than I? After all, you have so much more experience being me than I do...


I'm not really sure that's your definition.


Oh, ok! So you do know what my definitions are better than me. How fascinating! Do tell me, how long have you been me? 30 years? 31?

I'm just going by the general tenor of your posts in the forum. You seem to be rather judgmental of others, regardless of whether their doing whatever does not cause other people to be harmed.


I'm only judgemental of actions and attitudes which go against said principle.

And regardless of that, my statement of personal opinion about any certain activity does not count as trying to impede on other people's freedom. My freedom of expression does not impede on other people's freedom to whatever, ergo I am allowed to criticize ideas and concepts, as long as I'm not doing it in a derogatory, dehumanizing or silencing/marginalizing way.

But as always, good luck providing some evidence for your claims.


Ah, you're not impeding others by being judgmental. I get it. I think Phatscotty is also allowed to criticize ideas and concepts, as long as he's not doing it in a derogatory, dehumanizing, or silencing/marginalizing way too.

I suppose some could read your posts (and mine and Phatscotty's) as derogatory or marginalizing. Which, frankly, doesn't impede anyone from posting their beliefs or opinion, but, seem to fall under your definition of impeding. In sum, I'm not sure how Phatscotty's posts are any different than yours in the way they criticize or opine on current events with respect to whether they impede or don't impede someone's point of view. Phatscotty offers a point of view. You offer a point of view. I offer a point of view. Phatscotty's point of view does not impede your ability (or anyone else's) to do or say anything, just like your point of view does not impede Phatscotty's ability to do or say anything.

Example - Your idea of equal rights for women may be very different from my idea of equal rights for women. Does that mean your idea of equal rights for women is "people should be free to do the things I think people should do?"
Example - Your idea of freedom of religion may be very different than my idea of freedom of religion. Does that mean your idea of freedom of religion is "people should be free to do the things I think people should do?"


Oh, so your argument is basically the good old "if you're intolerant of intolerance, then you're just as bad as the intolerant people"... gotcha.


you might try ceasing to whine. You might even try using your head to think about stuff rather than just constantly attack people and call them names and bully them and try to hurt their feelings or make them look stupid. If you have an opinion that you want heard or a point to make, please, I beg you, go for it. If you just want to act like a grade school bully, save it.
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby Phatscotty on Thu May 10, 2012 6:36 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
natty dread wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
natty dread wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:I believe that's your definition as well (to be fair).


My definition is "everyone should be free to do whatever as long as it causes no harm to others or impede their respective freedoms".

But hey, I guess you know what I think better than I? After all, you have so much more experience being me than I do...


I'm not really sure that's your definition.


Oh, ok! So you do know what my definitions are better than me. How fascinating! Do tell me, how long have you been me? 30 years? 31?

I'm just going by the general tenor of your posts in the forum. You seem to be rather judgmental of others, regardless of whether their doing whatever does not cause other people to be harmed.


I'm only judgemental of actions and attitudes which go against said principle.

And regardless of that, my statement of personal opinion about any certain activity does not count as trying to impede on other people's freedom. My freedom of expression does not impede on other people's freedom to whatever, ergo I am allowed to criticize ideas and concepts, as long as I'm not doing it in a derogatory, dehumanizing or silencing/marginalizing way.

But as always, good luck providing some evidence for your claims.


Ah, you're not impeding others by being judgmental. I get it. I think Phatscotty is also allowed to criticize ideas and concepts, as long as he's not doing it in a derogatory, dehumanizing, or silencing/marginalizing way too.


Yet, Natty, Symmetry, Pimpdave, and a few others, seem to only be able to criticize in such ways. They even have other liberals cheering them on.
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby natty dread on Thu May 10, 2012 7:21 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
natty dread wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
natty dread wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:
I'm not really sure that's your definition.


Oh, ok! So you do know what my definitions are better than me. How fascinating! Do tell me, how long have you been me? 30 years? 31?

I'm just going by the general tenor of your posts in the forum. You seem to be rather judgmental of others, regardless of whether their doing whatever does not cause other people to be harmed.


I'm only judgemental of actions and attitudes which go against said principle.

And regardless of that, my statement of personal opinion about any certain activity does not count as trying to impede on other people's freedom. My freedom of expression does not impede on other people's freedom to whatever, ergo I am allowed to criticize ideas and concepts, as long as I'm not doing it in a derogatory, dehumanizing or silencing/marginalizing way.

But as always, good luck providing some evidence for your claims.


Ah, you're not impeding others by being judgmental. I get it. I think Phatscotty is also allowed to criticize ideas and concepts, as long as he's not doing it in a derogatory, dehumanizing, or silencing/marginalizing way too.

I suppose some could read your posts (and mine and Phatscotty's) as derogatory or marginalizing. Which, frankly, doesn't impede anyone from posting their beliefs or opinion, but, seem to fall under your definition of impeding. In sum, I'm not sure how Phatscotty's posts are any different than yours in the way they criticize or opine on current events with respect to whether they impede or don't impede someone's point of view. Phatscotty offers a point of view. You offer a point of view. I offer a point of view. Phatscotty's point of view does not impede your ability (or anyone else's) to do or say anything, just like your point of view does not impede Phatscotty's ability to do or say anything.

Example - Your idea of equal rights for women may be very different from my idea of equal rights for women. Does that mean your idea of equal rights for women is "people should be free to do the things I think people should do?"
Example - Your idea of freedom of religion may be very different than my idea of freedom of religion. Does that mean your idea of freedom of religion is "people should be free to do the things I think people should do?"


Oh, so your argument is basically the good old "if you're intolerant of intolerance, then you're just as bad as the intolerant people"... gotcha.


When the person who is being intolerant of intolerance is also the one defining intolerance, then yes.


So you're basically saying, that neo-nazis have a point when they claim "people should allow us to spread our racist propaganda and hate speech because otherwise they're intolerant of our racism"?

And if those same neo-nazis disagree with our definition of intolerance, we can't call them intolerant?

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight....
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class natty dread
 
Posts: 12877
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:58 pm
Location: just plain fucked

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby TA1LGUNN3R on Fri May 11, 2012 3:13 am

Phatscotty wrote:Remember, cops don't know people are schizophrenic upon the first 2 minutes of confronting him. Can you please stop putting the 20/20 hinsight as magically supposed to have been known by the police....talk about nonsense....check your own premise pal


I fail to see the relevance, really. My point is that just because you mouth of to a pig he shouldn't kill you or even be able to arrest you. If he can, that is not freedom. And for the record, they visited him almost daily to hassle him (listen to the vid, the fat one says something along the lines of "aren't you getting tired of us coming out here?"). So they knew he was mentally disabled in some way.

-TG
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class TA1LGUNN3R
 
Posts: 2699
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:52 am
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby thegreekdog on Fri May 11, 2012 11:28 am

natty dread wrote:So you're basically saying, that neo-nazis have a point when they claim "people should allow us to spread our racist propaganda and hate speech because otherwise they're intolerant of our racism"?

And if those same neo-nazis disagree with our definition of intolerance, we can't call them intolerant?

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight....


You can call them intolerant. I have no problem with that at all.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7246
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby / on Fri May 11, 2012 6:31 pm

If we make it a standard that the police have no right to automatically pass judgment on the people, then I believe they deserve the same benefit of doubt, all humans are subject to imperfection. Provocation is an issue, weather it involves private citizens or the police, just look at Australian laws where provocation can be used as an excuse for pretty much any type of assault.

And if the mental state of every person should be taken into account, so should the mental state of each officer, the police forces are much more susceptible to stress related mental and physical disorders than the average citizen.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 105029.htm

And unfortunately, like the general populace, the officers themselves often show a level distrust to authority that could help them, counselors, internal affairs, and superior officers.
So it's usually not a cut and dry case of "us versus them", or "good cop/bad cop", there needs to be a more developed way to evaluate such problems before everything snaps on either end. Accountability needs to increase, but so does help. So yes, if the actions warrant it, officers should be charged, the same way as any citizen, with justice.
Sergeant 1st Class /
 
Posts: 484
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:41 am

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby Phatscotty on Sat May 12, 2012 12:06 am

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:Remember, cops don't know people are schizophrenic upon the first 2 minutes of confronting him. Can you please stop putting the 20/20 hinsight as magically supposed to have been known by the police....talk about nonsense....check your own premise pal


I fail to see the relevance, really. My point is that just because you mouth of to a pig he shouldn't kill you or even be able to arrest you. If he can, that is not freedom. And for the record, they visited him almost daily to hassle him (listen to the vid, the fat one says something along the lines of "aren't you getting tired of us coming out here?"). So they knew he was mentally disabled in some way.

-TG


and.... my only point has been that mouthing off to a pig increases the chances that something bad will happen.
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby MeDeFe on Sat May 12, 2012 4:29 am

Phatscotty wrote:
TA1LGUNN3R wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:Remember, cops don't know people are schizophrenic upon the first 2 minutes of confronting him. Can you please stop putting the 20/20 hinsight as magically supposed to have been known by the police....talk about nonsense....check your own premise pal

I fail to see the relevance, really. My point is that just because you mouth of to a pig he shouldn't kill you or even be able to arrest you. If he can, that is not freedom. And for the record, they visited him almost daily to hassle him (listen to the vid, the fat one says something along the lines of "aren't you getting tired of us coming out here?"). So they knew he was mentally disabled in some way.

-TG

and.... my only point has been that mouthing off to a pig increases the chances that something bad will happen.

Do you think this is a more of a bad thing or a good thing?
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
User avatar
Major MeDeFe
 
Posts: 7831
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 2:48 am
Location: Follow the trail of holes in other people's arguments.

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby Phatscotty on Sat May 12, 2012 10:53 am

MeDeFe wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
TA1LGUNN3R wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:Remember, cops don't know people are schizophrenic upon the first 2 minutes of confronting him. Can you please stop putting the 20/20 hinsight as magically supposed to have been known by the police....talk about nonsense....check your own premise pal

I fail to see the relevance, really. My point is that just because you mouth of to a pig he shouldn't kill you or even be able to arrest you. If he can, that is not freedom. And for the record, they visited him almost daily to hassle him (listen to the vid, the fat one says something along the lines of "aren't you getting tired of us coming out here?"). So they knew he was mentally disabled in some way.

-TG

and.... my only point has been that mouthing off to a pig increases the chances that something bad will happen.

Do you think this is a more of a bad thing or a good thing?


I think mouthing off to a cop is a bad thing. I think a cop responding to mouthing off with force is a bad thing.

I think when a police officer tells you to put your hands out in front of you and not hold them behind you back, and you listen, it's much more likely bad things won't happen.
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby MeDeFe on Sat May 12, 2012 4:28 pm

Phatscotty wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
TA1LGUNN3R wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:Remember, cops don't know people are schizophrenic upon the first 2 minutes of confronting him. Can you please stop putting the 20/20 hinsight as magically supposed to have been known by the police....talk about nonsense....check your own premise pal

I fail to see the relevance, really. My point is that just because you mouth of to a pig he shouldn't kill you or even be able to arrest you. If he can, that is not freedom. And for the record, they visited him almost daily to hassle him (listen to the vid, the fat one says something along the lines of "aren't you getting tired of us coming out here?"). So they knew he was mentally disabled in some way.

-TG

and.... my only point has been that mouthing off to a pig increases the chances that something bad will happen.

Do you think this is a more of a bad thing or a good thing?

I think a cop responding to mouthing off with force is a bad thing.

Thank you.

Would you also agree that a cop responding with lethal force to someone mouthing off is a very bad thing?
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
User avatar
Major MeDeFe
 
Posts: 7831
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 2:48 am
Location: Follow the trail of holes in other people's arguments.

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby Phatscotty on Sat May 12, 2012 4:37 pm

MeDeFe wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
TA1LGUNN3R wrote:I fail to see the relevance, really. My point is that just because you mouth of to a pig he shouldn't kill you or even be able to arrest you. If he can, that is not freedom. And for the record, they visited him almost daily to hassle him (listen to the vid, the fat one says something along the lines of "aren't you getting tired of us coming out here?"). So they knew he was mentally disabled in some way.

-TG

and.... my only point has been that mouthing off to a pig increases the chances that something bad will happen.

Do you think this is a more of a bad thing or a good thing?

I think a cop responding to mouthing off with force is a bad thing. I think a cop responding to mouthing off with force is a bad thing.

I think when a police officer tells you to put your hands out in front of you and not hold them behind you back, and you listen, it's much more likely bad things won't happen.

Thank you.

Would you also agree that a cop responding with lethal force to someone mouthing off is a very bad thing?


I think the cops were trying to do something like this


I also think the victim might have been high on drugs. I think if they were to respond with lethal force, they would have went the "He's got a gun!" route, and shoot him. It's obvious the cops went too far and the little game you are playing is dumb.

I am not excusing the cops. Many here are excusing the man who did not put his hands in front of him and told the cops to start punching, and some might say started it by not complying to some simple basic verbal commands that are clearly in the name of safety (not holding your hands behind your back)

I read the entire story, and it's designed to get an emotional response. I am coming from a real world angle, with full understanding of the importance of the cop's orders.
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby Symmetry on Sat May 12, 2012 4:43 pm

ITT- Phatscotty, wannabe cop turned wannabe vigilante, explains his secret methods for detecting crime.
the world is in greater peril from those who tolerate or encourage evil than from those who actually commit it- Albert Einstein
User avatar
Sergeant Symmetry
 
Posts: 9255
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:49 am

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby TA1LGUNN3R on Sun May 13, 2012 1:02 pm

Phatscotty wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:and.... my only point has been that mouthing off to a pig increases the chances that something bad will happen.

Do you think this is a more of a bad thing or a good thing?

I think a cop responding to mouthing off with force is a bad thing. I think a cop responding to mouthing off with force is a bad thing.

I think when a police officer tells you to put your hands out in front of you and not hold them behind you back, and you listen, it's much more likely bad things won't happen.

Thank you.

Would you also agree that a cop responding with lethal force to someone mouthing off is a very bad thing?


I think the cops were trying to do something like this


I also think the victim might have been high on drugs. I think if they were to respond with lethal force, they would have went the "He's got a gun!" route, and shoot him. It's obvious the cops went too far and the little game you are playing is dumb.

I am not excusing the cops. Many here are excusing the man who did not put his hands in front of him and told the cops to start punching, and some might say started it by not complying to some simple basic verbal commands that are clearly in the name of safety (not holding your hands behind your back)

I read the entire story, and it's designed to get an emotional response. I am coming from a real world angle, with full understanding of the importance of the cop's orders.


That's a load of bullshit. The man broke no laws, and your blithe assumption that he was high is indicative of your attitude toward the dregs of society. Again, how many times must it be stated before you understand... Kelley was hassled. Do you also support searches without warrants?

-TG
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class TA1LGUNN3R
 
Posts: 2699
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:52 am
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue


Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby Phatscotty on Fri May 25, 2012 1:59 am

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
MeDeFe wrote:Do you think this is a more of a bad thing or a good thing?

I think a cop responding to mouthing off with force is a bad thing. I think a cop responding to mouthing off with force is a bad thing.

I think when a police officer tells you to put your hands out in front of you and not hold them behind you back, and you listen, it's much more likely bad things won't happen.

Thank you.

Would you also agree that a cop responding with lethal force to someone mouthing off is a very bad thing?


I think the cops were trying to do something like this


I also think the victim might have been high on drugs. I think if they were to respond with lethal force, they would have went the "He's got a gun!" route, and shoot him. It's obvious the cops went too far and the little game you are playing is dumb.

I am not excusing the cops. Many here are excusing the man who did not put his hands in front of him and told the cops to start punching, and some might say started it by not complying to some simple basic verbal commands that are clearly in the name of safety (not holding your hands behind your back)

I read the entire story, and it's designed to get an emotional response. I am coming from a real world angle, with full understanding of the importance of the cop's orders.


That's a load of bullshit. The man broke no laws, and your blithe assumption that he was high is indicative of your attitude toward the dregs of society. Again, how many times must it be stated before you understand... Kelley was hassled. Do you also support searches without warrants?

-TG


It was a guess, not an assumption. Perhaps the man did break no laws. I don't know. How do you?
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby TA1LGUNN3R on Fri May 25, 2012 4:32 am

PS wrote:It was a guess, not an assumption. Perhaps the man did break no laws. I don't know. How do you?


Because I read the article instead of just assuming that a crazy homeless man was breaking laws. The cops responded to a different call; they came upon Kelley and started talking to him. They had talked to him several times (as per what fatty in the video says) over the course of days/weeks.

-TG
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class TA1LGUNN3R
 
Posts: 2699
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:52 am
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby Woodruff on Fri May 25, 2012 12:53 pm

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:I read the entire story, and it's designed to get an emotional response. I am coming from a real world angle, with full understanding of the importance of the cop's orders.


That's a load of bullshit. The man broke no laws, and your blithe assumption that he was high is indicative of your attitude toward the dregs of society. Again, how many times must it be stated before you understand... Kelley was hassled. Do you also support searches without warrants?


Of course he does, for those nasty poor people! He probably thinks that they deserve it!
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby Phatscotty on Fri May 25, 2012 8:49 pm

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:
PS wrote:It was a guess, not an assumption. Perhaps the man did break no laws. I don't know. How do you?


Because I read the article instead of just assuming that a crazy homeless man was breaking laws. The cops responded to a different call; they came upon Kelley and started talking to him. They had talked to him several times (as per what fatty in the video says) over the course of days/weeks.

-TG


I read the article too.

The cops came and started talking to him....and he let the police know that we was ready for a fight. Then, a fight happened.

Shocker!
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby TA1LGUNN3R on Sat May 26, 2012 6:41 am

Phatscotty wrote:
TA1LGUNN3R wrote:
PS wrote:It was a guess, not an assumption. Perhaps the man did break no laws. I don't know. How do you?


Because I read the article instead of just assuming that a crazy homeless man was breaking laws. The cops responded to a different call; they came upon Kelley and started talking to him. They had talked to him several times (as per what fatty in the video says) over the course of days/weeks.

-TG


I read the article too.

The cops came and started talking to him....and he let the police know that we was ready for a fight. Then, a fight happened.

Shocker!


You mean after approximately 15 minutes of being hassled and ridiculed, he didn't want to put his hands behind his back? After being wrongfully and illegally detained, he failed to show the necessary submissive action? What a terror! I think you're onto something here, old chap. It's clear that this homeless, probably malnourished man was an obvious menace to the small moon with a gun. In fact, I think there was an implied threat just from the man's greasy hair. And since s.o.p is to beat them into submission, then everything's a-okay.

But super serial now, I'm really done. I don't know why I continued to engage an obvious hypocrite. Maybe one day you'll ask yourself why nobody takes you seriously, Scott. That's why. You prattle on about causes, and yet when it comes down to brass tax, you throw the defining actions by wayside. So, while you pretend to support freedom, it's clear to just about everybody else that it's an affectation of a cause to justify your otherwise untenable positions.

I hope you know that it's actions and words such as yours that are probably most destructive to the cause of libertarianism. I mean, who wants to vote for Ron Paul when his most ardent supporters are hypocritical nut-jobs.

-TG
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class TA1LGUNN3R
 
Posts: 2699
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:52 am
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Sat May 26, 2012 6:51 am

TG, Phatscotty is just trolling. Let it go, he's not worth it.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Should This Pig Be Charged With Assault?

Postby TA1LGUNN3R on Sat May 26, 2012 7:05 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:TG, Phatscotty is just trolling. Let it go, he's not worth it.


Yeah, I'm done. Wanna make out?

-TG
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class TA1LGUNN3R
 
Posts: 2699
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:52 am
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue

PreviousNext

Return to Acceptable Content

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users