The hero warrior cop is ready to get roided up, rape, and drink and drive - Page 309 - Miata Turbo Forum -Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Current Events, News, Politics Keep the politics here.

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-29-2015, 01:29 PM   #6161
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24,671
Total Cats: 1,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
find a post in this thread where I (or anyone else that I can think of) have advocated violence or death against police.
Post # 6156.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
and then should I find all the times you've suggested 100% completely innocent people should die or be harmed because the were annoying/noncomplient/in wrong place/black/a jew to your hilter?
You've made it clear that you oppose restrictions on the civilian ownership of firearms, and support the possession and use of firearms for the purpose of killing people. The only qualifying factor you impose on this is that the people being killed must fit certain criteria of behavior which you deem to constitute justification. Eg: they are actively engaged in assaulting / raping / killing someone else who is not a police officer and whom you deem not to have subjectively qualified as deserving of said treatment. You ascribe the term "innocent" to these individuals.


You and I are really agreeing upon the same fundamental concepts here. I simply prefer that the mandate to kill another human be vested in an authority which is constitutionally-sanctioned, governed by the rules of law and due process, and accountable to the public, rather than being distributed to the impulse judgement of private individuals, be they police officers or just some random hillbilly who lives within tobacco-spitting distance of the nearest Wal-Mart gun aisle.


We both want to protect the innocent from the criminal. I'm just proposing that we adopt a clear mandate, rather than leaving it to mob justice as you have so often suggested.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 01:58 PM   #6162
Boost Czar

iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,163
Total Cats: 1,401
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
Post # 6156.
*that wasn't obvious satire / hyperbole / sarcasm.


I use the term innocent, because in many of the stories I've posted here people are completely innocent of any law violation. Any even if they aren't it doesn't matter, they have the right not to be murdered before they go to a judge.

Being an ******* isn't agianst the law, in no way should that constitute violence against your person by way of the state. I reject your mandate.

speaking of mobs:

Quote:
...But a government that initiates the employment of force against men who had forced no one, the employment of armed compulsion against disarmed victims, is a nightmare infernal machine designed to annihilate morality: such a government reverses its only moral purpose and switches from the role of protector to the role of man’s deadliest enemy, from the role of policeman to the role of a criminal vested with the right to the wielding of violence against victims deprived of the right of self-defense. Such a government substitutes for morality the following rule of social conduct: you may do whatever you please to your neighbor, provided your gang is bigger than his.
I wholeheartly believe the above.

It's not the police's job to phyically harm people -- And I've never said a police officer can't defend himself from harm -- but they need to repsond appropriately. Just because you have the authoriztion to use deadly force in certain situations doesn't mean that's how you always need to respond with suchs levels of force.

A stupid kid trying to drive away from a cop because his girlfriend was caught buying drugs should never be a death sentense. Cops are a trained to kill, they are no longer trained to simply enforce laws.

You're the one that wants to go back to the 1850's where the San Franscisco vigilantes ran around killing everyone that they didn't like -- Litterally mob justice. I just want those who yeild power be held accountable for their actions and be given the same treatment as any other person when they operate outside the law.

Quote:
As [the vigilantes] controlled the press, they wrote their own history, and the world generally gives them the credit of having purged San Francisco of rowdies and roughs; but their success has given great stimulus to a dangerous principle, that would at any time justify the mob in seizing all the power of government; and who is to say that the Vigilance Committee may not be composed of the worst, instead of the best, elements of a community? Indeed, in San Francisco, as soon as it was demonstrated that the real power had passed from the City Hall to the committee room, the same set of bailiffs, constables, and rowdies that had infested the City Hall were found in the employment of the "Vigilantes."

Last edited by Braineack; 10-29-2015 at 02:24 PM.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 01:58 PM   #6163
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,255
Total Cats: 105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
...

I simply prefer that the mandate to kill another human be vested in an authority which is constitutionally-sanctioned, governed by the rules of law and due process, and accountable to the public ...
A comforting notion indeed, but I thought the whole point of this thread was to vividly illustrate how the existence of such an authority may be a myth.
good2go is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 02:10 PM   #6164
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24,671
Total Cats: 1,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by good2go View Post
A comforting notion indeed, but I thought the whole point of this thread was to vividly illustrate how the existence of such an authority may be a myth.
I get the impression that you are confusing the police with the judiciary, or viewing them as functionally indistinguishable or inseparable.


Brainey argues that the police should not have the authority to summarily execute people, but that ordinary citizens should have the authority to summarily execute people if they deem it to be reasonable.

I agree that the police should not have the authority to summarily execute people, and propose that the judicial branch, which already possesses and exercises this authority, albeit on a limited basis, should have said authority expanded to authorize capital punishment for crimes which are comparable to treason, but in peacetime.

I also allow for the fact (post # 6088) that there are alternatives to capital punishment which are similarly effective, though slightly more costly.


Nopony here is arguing in favor of the police acting as executioners. I'm merely breathing a sigh of relief every time they do happen to illegally execute someone who would have otherwise slipped through the cracks of the judiciary as it exists today. No harm, no foul, as they say.

In other words, both police reform (limitation of power) and judicial reform (expansion of powers) are necessary.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 02:29 PM   #6165
Boost Czar

iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,163
Total Cats: 1,401
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
Brainey argues that the police should not have the authority to summarily execute people, but that ordinary citizens should have the authority to summarily execute people if they deem it to be reasonable.
Is this CNBC?


Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 03:02 PM   #6166
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (6)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,486
Total Cats: 373
Default

Since when does a citizen's right to self-defense equal "summary execution"? The homocide isn't delivered as a just punishment for the conviction of a crime, it's a secondary consequence of using violent force to stop an assault.
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 03:21 PM   #6167
Boost Czar

iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,163
Total Cats: 1,401
Default

Dont make me get scared.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 03:32 PM   #6168
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24,671
Total Cats: 1,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau View Post
The homocide isn't delivered as a just punishment for the conviction of a crime, it's a secondary consequence of using violent force to stop an assault.
This is exactly the same thing as killing people who are ********. Their death is a secondary consequence of using violent force to stop them from assaulting society as a whole.

And I support that wholeheartedly, even going so far as to begrudgingly tolerate it when it occurs on an ad-hoc basis as the consequence of illegal police homicides. (It's a non-optimal means of achieving a desirable outcome, in the absence of more palatable options.)

I also recognize that there are non-lethal alternatives, as I've detailed in the past. Segregation, internment and exile are all completely practical and non-violent means of achieving the same goal.


That can't be said for Brainey's "give everyone a gun and let 'em shoot whoever they feel threatened by" proposal.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 03:34 PM   #6169
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (6)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,486
Total Cats: 373
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
This is exactly the same thing as killing people who are ********. Their death is a secondary consequence of using violent force to stop them from assaulting society as a whole.
No, that's an utterly ridiculous argument. I'm not bothering with this.
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 03:52 PM   #6170
Boost Czar

iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,163
Total Cats: 1,401
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
That can't be said for Brainey's "give everyone a gun and let 'em shoot whoever they feel threatened by" proposal.
Isn't this exactly what I've been here advocating against?
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 04:00 PM   #6171
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24,671
Total Cats: 1,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
Isn't this exactly what I've been here advocating against?
I went back and did some some light spot-checking in the various threads which concern guns, gun-ownership and gun-regulation.

I'm pretty sure that the tenor of your opinions in these threads can broadly be summarized as "don't restrict the ability of private citizens who have no particular training in constitutional law or conflict-resolution, and who are not part of a regulated militia or other organized body sanctioned with the duty of maintaining civil order, to own and carry firearms."


Or are you even more of a liberal than I thought?
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 04:10 PM   #6172
Boost Czar

iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,163
Total Cats: 1,401
Default

you skipped the whole: ...let 'em shoot whoever they feel threatened by



I heard the getsapo were great at conflict-resolution.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 04:13 PM   #6173
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24,671
Total Cats: 1,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
you skipped the whole: ...let 'em shoot whoever they feel threatened by
I thought it was implied. You haven't offered any specific suggestions as to what certifications or organizational memberships should be a prerequisite to accessing the second amendment.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 04:45 PM   #6174
Boost Czar

iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,163
Total Cats: 1,401
Default The hero warrior state legislature is in fear and ready to create laws

US citizenship. I thought that was implied.

Last edited by Braineack; 10-29-2015 at 05:00 PM.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 05:08 PM   #6175
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24,671
Total Cats: 1,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
US citizenship. I thought that was implied.
So, given that the only requirement for US citizenship is "be born here and have a pulse," that's basically the same thing as "let 'em shoot whoever they feel threatened by."

Whether it's evil, racist cops or untrained and uneducated citizens, either way you have people shooting whoever they feel threatened by with no recourse except to charge them with manslaughter / murder after the fact.

My way (let the courts decide who lives and who dies before killing them) is much more civil. It's also the law of the land.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 05:17 PM   #6176
Boost Czar

iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,163
Total Cats: 1,401
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
So, given that the only requirement for US citizenship is "be born here and have a pulse," that's basically the same thing as "let 'em shoot whoever they feel threatened by."
not even close.


not even remotely close.



the 2nd amendment gives us the right to own and bear guns, not to "let 'em shoot whoever they feel threatened by."

I find it odd that someone that has an issue with people "shoot[ing] whoever they feel threatened by" supports the police to "shoot whoever they feel threatened by".
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 05:37 PM   #6177
Boost Czar

iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,163
Total Cats: 1,401
Default


cops do not need to know the law they are "enforcing" (when they arent busy shoot[ing] whoever they feel threatened by)

Quote:
An unnamed Naples cop is on administrative leave this week after he was caught on camera flipping off a citizen.

The video, posted to Facebook on Wednesday by David Tripp, shows the officer callously walking up to the innocent man and flipping him off — something that cops have a tendency to arrest people for.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 05:40 PM   #6178
Boost Czar

iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,163
Total Cats: 1,401
Default

no hall pass, no problem.

School Cop Punches 16-Year-Old Student in the Face for Not Having a Hall Pass | The Free Thought Project

Quote:
A school resource officer was recently arrested after he was caught assaulting a student on a surveillance recording. The student had reportedly been in the hallway without a pass, and after he was confronted by officer Thomas Jaha, he went to get a drink of water.

Since he did not leave the hallway immediately and go directly back to class, Jaha went into a rage and attacked the 16-year old boy. Jaha is now facing a misdemeanor assault charge.

Jaha says that the student took an “aggressive stance” so he began to strike the boy, and it was all caught on the school’s video surveillance camera.

“He struck a student twice in the head after this student got in an aggressive stance and faced the master sergeant,” Capt. Paco Balderrama of the Oklahoma City Police Department said.

In the video, the student can be seen walking out of the bathroom with the officer, and while, on his way back to class, he stops at the water fountain for a drink. The water fountain was directly next to the bathroom that they were walking out of, and the teen did not have to go out of his way or waste any time to get a drink of water. The student’s choice to get a drink of water along the way was seen as a sign of disrespect by the officer, who then took it upon himself to assault the boy.

While the teenager did not hit the officer at any time, the officer claims that he hit him in self-defense because the boy allegedly took an aggressive stance and balled his fists, which is not depicted in the video.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 05:43 PM   #6179
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (6)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,486
Total Cats: 373
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
I find it odd that someone that has an issue with people "shoot[ing] whoever they feel threatened by" supports the police to "shoot whoever they feel threatened by".
If history has taught us anything, isn't it that creating a special, protected class of individuals with more rights than everyone else and little accountability to anyone above them generally is to everyone's benefit?
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2015, 06:14 PM   #6180
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24,671
Total Cats: 1,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
the 2nd amendment gives us the right to own and bear guns, not to "let 'em shoot whoever they feel threatened by."
Quite true.

And, obviously, there's never any debate or disagreement about whether an untrained civilian with a gun was justified in shooting someone.




In today's news, here are a bunch of upstanding citizens exercising their second amendment rights, and using good judgement in doing so.




Passing anti-gun laws does not stop criminals from using guns.

Passing pro-gun laws does not stop idiots from exercising bad judgement.
Attached Thumbnails
The hero warrior cop is ready to get roided up, rape, and drink and drive-george-zimmerman_0.jpg  
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hello Everybody! (See Dr. Nick) NicDrilling Meet and Greet 16 01-26-2016 12:00 PM
White smoke help :( Minosum DIY Turbo Discussion 5 11-18-2015 01:18 AM
OE Toyota capacitor for COPS el maestro DIY Turbo Discussion 6 11-16-2015 11:01 PM
Greeting from yet another newb mazdarotty Meet and Greet 1 11-15-2015 09:54 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:08 PM.