Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-09-2016, 12:34 PM
 
Location: Wonderland
67,650 posts, read 60,844,304 times
Reputation: 101073

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
So you agree with me but you have to state it in another manner to appear you aren't really.
I don't recall you saying what I said, so I don't know how you reach this particular conclusion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-09-2016, 12:39 PM
 
3,368 posts, read 1,604,140 times
Reputation: 1652
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieB.Good View Post
Pretty much any case where people have tried to absolve or mitigate the wrongness of LE actions b/c someone didn't comply.

These are the same people claiming to be vigilant against oppressive, authoritarian tyranny. They claim it's their right to challenge abuses of power. They don't preface their defense of their right with, "but first, we're going to comply with the power we're challenging..."

The only time these staunch defenders of our individual right to confront tyranny retreat from this position is when they are defending LE use of force against someone else.

Freedom to confront tyranny for me, not for thee...



Yep. And when they come to your door, I expect you to comply like a good citizen. B/c anything less than that justifies what comes next, right?
Lol...
So, you are likening standing up for a constitutional human right, to someone's desire to act in a way that the near entirety of our society has deemed illegal? The two things are in no way related.

That may be the source of your confusion. when facing a contradiction check your premise, you'll find that one of them is wrong.
Tyranny does not equal commonly agreed upon and accepted interactions with LEO's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2016, 12:40 PM
 
79,913 posts, read 44,167,332 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by KathrynAragon View Post
I don't recall you saying what I said, so I don't know how you reach this particular conclusion.
You said the same thing I did.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2016, 12:44 PM
 
3,368 posts, read 1,604,140 times
Reputation: 1652
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
So you agree with me but you have to state it in another manner to appear you aren't really.
No, I believe your assessment is allowing for the inclusion of being a danger to those around you and threatening those who try to protect the safety of said surrounding party's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2016, 12:45 PM
 
Location: Tri STATE!!!
8,518 posts, read 3,751,473 times
Reputation: 6349
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter View Post
Just comply only applies to blacks when being confronted by a cop. We're actually supposed to keep a shoe shine kit on us and offer to shine their boots too.

If we don't, then we're non compliant and should be shot.
Brilliant post.... cant rep you enough.. dont forget to tap dance and grin!!! But if you are Cliven Bundy you get support from fuax news and sitting members of congress. Beyonce dresses up with an afro and tight black leather and she is unamerican and a traitor.... ex congressman calls for war on the president and he is a Murican Patriot.... wtf!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2016, 12:48 PM
 
79,913 posts, read 44,167,332 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo302 View Post
No, I believe your assessment is allowing for the inclusion of being a danger to those around you and threatening those who try to protect the safety of said surrounding party's.
Which is a big part of the problem. I do not excuse indefensible actions of law enforcement, hence I must support an actual threat towards them according to you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2016, 01:04 PM
 
3,368 posts, read 1,604,140 times
Reputation: 1652
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Which is a big part of the problem. I do not excuse indefensible actions of law enforcement, hence I must support an actual threat towards them according to you.
Nope. You making that statement up out of thin air, and applying it to me with no rationale, is the source of your flawed perception.

I do not believe that, and did not make that presumption. Your premise is flawed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2016, 01:13 PM
 
79,913 posts, read 44,167,332 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo302 View Post
Nope. You making that statement up out of thin air, and applying it to me with no rationale, is the source of your flawed perception.

I do not believe that, and did not make that presumption. Your premise is flawed.
You did make that presumption.

Quote:
No, I believe your assessment is allowing for the inclusion of being a danger to those around you and threatening those who try to protect the safety of said surrounding party's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2016, 01:27 PM
 
3,368 posts, read 1,604,140 times
Reputation: 1652
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
You did make that presumption.
No. Hence the words, "I believe". Your statements regarding "just comply" led me to believe you are including scenarios where people were considered a threat to others, which is why I communicated that point to you.

If you do not, then we can agree we are on the same page. However, that means you were very unclear in your earlier statements regarding your stance on the matter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2016, 01:44 PM
 
79,913 posts, read 44,167,332 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimbo302 View Post
No. Hence the words, "I believe". Your statements regarding "just comply" led me to believe you are including scenarios where people were considered a threat to others, which is why I communicated that point to you.
YES, you presumed. Do you not understand the word?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:23 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top