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.
I'm guessing any plan will run into big trouble trying to distinguish between perfectly legal protesters and the tiny minority of rioters. And, really, should someone lose benefits for, say, graffiti? And for how long? I doubt there's any law forbidding benefits to someone who has committed a crime in the past.
It seems like a dangerous slippery slope to me, but it fits right in with the punishing squelching mindset of Republicans.
Tell me, which of the "protesters" that attacked Kyle Rittenhouse was a "peaceful protester"? The convicted felon that threw a brick at him? Or the convicted felon that struck him in the head with a skateboard? Or the nice young man that kicked him in the head as he lay on the street? Or perhaps the convicted felon with a handgun that attacked him?
I haven't received any money from Soros yet. What's your source? How much was I supposed to get?
I'll wait patiently for your answer
Have you filled your rioting quota yet? Maybe they think your feeling powerful in a group is payment enough. Better talk to George, you're likely missing out.
"Chicago Police Department officers showed footage Monday of last weekend’s attack on a statue of Christopher Columbus in the city, in which rioters armed with projectiles used “peaceful” protests as a cover for attacks on police."
Guess what fools? The "peaceful" protesters are libel.
Vandalism. You are deflecting. We're talking about arson. Go see what arson and shooting "commercial" fireworks aka mortars and using slingshots, lasers, etc. on law enforcement is gonna get you.
Go eat your milk toast someplace else.
I am still unclear why we need new laws. Shouldn’t we just enforce the ones on the books?
I'm guessing any plan will run into big trouble trying to distinguish between perfectly legal protesters and the tiny minority of rioters. And, really, should someone lose benefits for, say, graffiti? And for how long? I doubt there's any law forbidding benefits to someone who has committed a crime in the past.
It seems like a dangerous slippery slope to me, but it fits right in with the punishing squelching mindset of Republicans.
I'm going to do more than punish the violent protestors who destroyed my business that I built for the last 20 years, now I have nothing to lose. Its headhunting time!
Yep, this is an attempt to equate 'protesting' with rioting/looting...its working too!
the MSM does it constantly, but NOW you complain?
it actually does nothing of the sort:
Quote:
The “Support Peaceful Protest Act” targets those who were arrested for committing crimes such as acts of violence, looting or vandalism at a protest. The bill suggests that rioters are to pay for the cost of federal policing and be ineligible for unemployment assistance.
I'm guessing any plan will run into big trouble trying to distinguish between perfectly legal protesters and the tiny minority of rioters. And, really, should someone lose benefits for, say, graffiti? And for how long? I doubt there's any law forbidding benefits to someone who has committed a crime in the past.
It seems like a dangerous slippery slope to me, but it fits right in with the punishing squelching mindset of Republicans.
Look at these words:
"perfectly legal protesters" when the plan clearly states "rioters". A shill would try to confuse the 2.
"tiny minority", as if the number means jack all. A shill would try to lead people to believe it's no big deal because it's just a few people. Doesn't matter how many people are involved, the destruction they do is huge.
"for say, graffiti" as if that's all they're doing. A shill would try to make people believe that a) graffiti is a harmless, victimless crime, and b) that the terrorist rioters are not destroying property, breaking windows, setting buildings on fire, looting, harassing people, beating people, killing people, torturing animals, etc. No, a shill would have you believe that they're just spraying a little graffiti around.
"dangerous slippery slope" - a shill would have you believe that there's no possible way that the police can, and have, identified many of these terrorist rioters in the past, and that would make it very easy to cut off their benefits for committing the crimes they commit.
"punishing, squelching mindset" Only a shill would apologize for these Marxist terrorist rioters and try to blame what they're doing on the right. People on the left also realize it, and that's why they are leaving and voting for Trump this year. They've said it right out loud on this forum, but the shill would have you believe that punishment for horrific crimes is a bad thing.
Of course, some people don't care about what happens to this country, as long as they get paid.
"perfectly legal protesters" when the plan clearly states "rioters". A shill would try to confuse the 2.
"tiny minority", as if the number means jack all. A shill would try to lead people to believe it's no big deal because it's just a few people. Doesn't matter how many people are involved, the destruction they do is huge.
"for say, graffiti" as if that's all they're doing. A shill would try to make people believe that a) graffiti is a harmless, victimless crime, and b) that the terrorist rioters are not destroying property, breaking windows, setting buildings on fire, looting, harassing people, beating people, killing people, torturing animals, etc. No, a shill would have you believe that they're just spraying a little graffiti around.
"dangerous slippery slope" - a shill would have you believe that there's no possible way that the police can, and have, identified many of these terrorist rioters in the past, and that would make it very easy to cut off their benefits for committing the crimes they commit.
"punishing, squelching mindset" Only a shill would apologize for these Marxist terrorist rioters and try to blame what they're doing on the right. People on the left also realize it, and that's why they are leaving and voting for Trump this year. They've said it right out loud on this forum, but the shill would have you believe that punishment for horrific crimes is a bad thing.
Of course, some people don't care about what happens to this country, as long as they get paid.
Again, these things you have listed are already illegal. Why do we need new laws?
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.
