Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I mean considering the majority of the world used to be conservative and society has degenerated from that, yeah.is that like, the actual rule of thumb that we want to use? what people did 300 years ago
federal officials, as in preventing people from entering / proceedingdid that actually happen tho? also like, I don't think this is actually a law, since people have done disruptive sit-ins in federal buildings before and haven't been thrown in jail for 10 years
Holy stuff the poll. BLF is a bastion of conservatism in a sea of degeneracy.So is 'degeneracy' just the new catch-all term for queers, liberals, non-Christians, and all other undesirables that ultraconservatives want to see thrown out of the country?
Either way, I don't remember her ever saying that she would eradicate the TPP during the election.http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/11/hillary-clinton-says-shell-kill-tpp/
I thought hillary was pro-TPPShe called it 'The Gold Standard' awhile back, but her position during the election was that she wanted to kill it.
I'm not disappointed in Annoying Orange yet, I just don't know why he's chosen Steven Mnuchin & others. If one of his main points is to drain the "swamp" and he's recruiting some of the "swamp," there's more than likely a reason for it other than "hurr drumpf doesn't know what he's doing."I respect that you're aware of the hypocrisy here.
is it cruel and unusual punishment to kill someone for blocking traffic, remembering that they also could be blocking emergency services and halting commerce, putting people's lives and livelihoods at stake, after everything else they've tried doesn't work?Yes, because you can still forcefully throw people into police vans without opening fire on them. Plus, we don't execute people for making fake 911 calls, even though those waste the time of EMS crews. The only reason people here are so gung-ho about supporting this nonsense is because they think they'll get to watch BLM protestors get shot to death.
Who would win in a fight Sam Hyde or the entire shia sect of Islam?(the Sunnis are the ones running CIA)
you mean lawbreakers?There's also something called 'cruel and unusual punishment', which is explicitly forbidden in our constitution. It's the reason why we don't crucify people for murder, or execute people for traffic violations.
no that's called enforcing the loving law
I'm libertarian, but this is a bit of authoritarianism I can get behind.I'm pretty sure authoritarianism directed only towards certain groups of people is like a working definition for fascism.
The way you try to frame this is hilarious. They only reason that the police would use lethal force in the first place would be if the protesters were violently attacking them.Massive shootouts between armed police and unarmed civilians can happen without any specific trigger. Hence Kent State.
Yes, but just because it's allowed doesn't mean every cop who runs into the situation will suddenly become cold killers as you keep trying to tell.That's literally not what I'm saying at all. Let me be as clear about this as I can - even if this bill were to pass, I'd wager >99% of cops would not be willing to use lethal force on a crowd of highway blockers.
Saying mean things =/= blocking off traffic.Neither of those things are worthy of lethal force. I deleted 'destroying property' because that's not actually mentioned in the bill. You could just have a crowd of people standing in the highway and this law legalizes mowing them down.
