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.
Attempting to find a loophole in a law to allow authoritarian action against US citizens without warrants should terrify you.
If we really think that law is being followed accurately, why did Trump claim he was only sending federal troops to portland to protect federal buildings? Or are you saying you directly support the federal government arresting our own citizens without warrants?
Attempting to find a loophole in a law to allow authoritarian action against US citizens without warrants should terrify you.
If we really think that law is being followed accurately, why did Trump claim he was only sending federal troops to portland to protect federal buildings? Or are you saying you directly support the federal government arresting our own citizens without warrants?
You are twisting yourself in knots here trying to defend violent rioters, you have my sympathy because I'm pretty sure you know that the BS you are spouting will get you laughed at, but you seemingly have no choice.
It's not "authoritarian" to defend property and arrest those who attack federal property....even if they are a few feet off of federal property when you catch them. You don't need a warrant to detain someone you see vandalizing or trespassing on federal property. I'm sure you know that, you are just forced to play dumb here.
Honestly, the "storm troopers" rhetoric is solely for the absolute least intelligent people in the country. They eat that BS up while everyone else laughs at them or rolls their eyes at them for it.
Attempting to find a loophole in a law to allow authoritarian action against US citizens without warrants should terrify you.
If we really think that law is being followed accurately, why did Trump claim he was only sending federal troops to portland to protect federal buildings? Or are you saying you directly support the federal government arresting our own citizens without warrants?
loophole?
Homeland Security Act of 2002 was created in...2002.
Trump was Mr Civilian in 2002.
Creepy Joe was a senator and Crazy Nancy Pelosi was house minority leader for the democrat in 2002
You are twisting yourself in knots here trying to defend violent rioters, you have my sympathy because I'm pretty sure you know that the BS you are spouting will get you laughed at, but you seemingly have no choice.
It's not "authoritarian" to defend property and arrest those who attack federal property....even if they are a few feet off of federal property when you catch them. You don't need a warrant to detain someone you see vandalizing or trespassing on federal property. I'm sure you know that, you are just forced to play dumb here.
Honestly, the "storm troopers" rhetoric is solely for the absolute least intelligent people in the country. They eat that BS up while everyone else laughs at them or rolls their eyes at them for it.
Anyone caught actively attempting to destroy property or harm a person should be arrested. It's odd how as many times as I repeat that, the right wing on this forum keep claiming I defend rioters. Firing tear gas into crows of people, or beating a person who already has their hands in the air isn't defending against violent rioters.
Sending federal troops to enact what the federal government wants without warrants, by force, against the wishes of the local government is definitely authoritarian.
Homeland Security Act of 2002 was created in...2002.
Trump was Mr Civilian in 2002.
Creepy Joe was a senator and Crazy Nancy Pelosi was house minority leader for the democrat in 2002
You forgot to answer my question. I can ask it again. Are you saying you directly support the federal government arresting our own citizens without warrants? Yes or no please.
You are twisting yourself in knots here trying to defend violent rioters, you have my sympathy because I'm pretty sure you know that the BS you are spouting will get you laughed at, but you seemingly have no choice.
It's not "authoritarian" to defend property and arrest those who attack federal property....even if they are a few feet off of federal property when you catch them. You don't need a warrant to detain someone you see vandalizing or trespassing on federal property. I'm sure you know that, you are just forced to play dumb here.
Honestly, the "storm troopers" rhetoric is solely for the absolute least intelligent people in the country. They eat that BS up while everyone else laughs at them or rolls their eyes at them for it.
the lefts are desperately trying to legitimized their argument by calling United States Federal Law Enforcement officers/agents as "troops" or "storm troopers"
"hey, I got arrested by storm troopers after I looted a federal property"
or
"hey, I got arrested by a federal cop after I looted a federal property"
Anyone caught actively attempting to destroy property or harm a person should be arrested. It's odd how as many times as I repeat that, the right wing on this forum keep claiming I defend rioters. Firing tear gas into crows of people, or beating a person who already has their hands in the air isn't defending against violent rioters.
Sending federal troops to enact what the federal government wants without warrants, by force, against the wishes of the local government is definitely authoritarian.
Firing tear gas in order to break up an insurrection is the kindest possible way of getting the job done. IMO they should just open fire. Those people would deserve it and they wouldn't be missed. I simply don't have the tolerance for violent communist insurrection that some do.
Also, you are here actively defending the rioters by attacking the only people standing up to them. Sorry guy, it's obvious. If the state and local government were doing their job and enforcing the law, the federal government wouldn't have to step in.....but that's what happens when you vote for communists. Cities like Portland and Seattle get what they deserve.
You forgot to answer my question. I can ask it again. Are you saying you directly support the federal government arresting our own citizens without warrants? Yes or no please.
make arrests without a warrant for any offense against the United States committed in the presence of the officer or agent or for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if the officer or agent has reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing a felony;
Firing tear gas in order to break up an insurrection is the kindest possible way of getting the job done. IMO they should just open fire. Those people would deserve it and they wouldn't be missed. I simply don't have the tolerance for violent communist insurrection that some do.
Also, you are here actively defending the rioters by attacking the only people standing up to them. Sorry guy, it's obvious. If the state and local government were doing their job and enforcing the law, the federal government wouldn't have to step in.....but that's what happens when you vote for communists. Cities like Portland and Seattle get what they deserve.
So you do support authoritarian regimes, and oppose freedom of speech.
I know the verbiage of the law. I asked a different question. Are you saying you directly support the federal government arresting our own citizens without warrants? Yes or no.
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.
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.
