- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Man dead after refusing to show police ID
Posted on 3/3/14 at 4:57 pm to DawgfaninCa
Posted on 3/3/14 at 4:57 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:Not surprisingly, you are no better at building strawmen than you are understanding the concept of freedom.
Oh, I see now, you clearly have no concept of what freedom is or should be.
This is my biggest fear, that Americans are being incrementally conditioned to believe that Fascism is freedom.
I see it is already working on some.
So you are claiming that Henry M. Robert who wrote Robert's Rules of Order didn't know what freedom is or should be and was a fascist.
You are just trying to argue sophistically that anarchy is freedom and liberty.
It isn't.
1
Posted on 3/3/14 at 4:58 pm to TK421
quote:
It is an unwanted confrontation. That is harassment.
bullshite.
To harrass means 1. To irritate or torment persistently.
2. To wear out; exhaust.
3. To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated attacks or raids.
Harassment means to trouble persistently or incessantly.
Stopping someone once on the suspicion of committing a crime and asking them to identify themselves is not persistently or incessantly troubling them.
This post was edited on 3/3/14 at 5:01 pm
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:01 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:
To harrass means 1. To irritate or torment persistently.
They killed a guy. Is that not harassment or torment?
How about this girl?
LINK
I'm sure you are okay with them harassing her, she's black.
quote:
3. To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated attacks or raids.
How about knock less raids on the wrong house? Would that count or would you excuse even more egregious behavior of your jack-booted comrades?
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:02 pm to DawgfaninCa
Well definition number one certainly applies. And police are the enemy, they are NOT your friends under any circumstances
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:04 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:Unfortunately, today's police apparently lack the capability of knowing a suspect's general identifying characteristics when called to a location (e.g., Are we looking for a man, or are we looking for a woman?). That would be helpful in filtering out law-abiding citizens.
Unfortunately, today's police force don't have unified mind-reading abilities capable of identifying the murderers from the law-abiding citizens so when the police reasonably suspect someone has com
You know . . . so they don't get killed in the process.
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:04 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
Not surprisingly, you are no better at building strawmen than you are understanding the concept of freedom.
My idea of freedom and liberty is the same as Henry M. Robert's idea of freedom and liberty.
You probably don't even know what Robert's Rules of Order are and will have to goggle them.
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:05 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:
You probably don't even know what Robert's Rules of Order
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:06 pm to DawgfaninCa
It's frightening that people like you actually exist who want murderers to be able to refuse to identify themselves
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fortunately, today's police force has been given unified mind-reading abilities capable of identifying the murderers from the law-abiding citizens.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fortunately, today's police force has been given unified mind-reading abilities capable of identifying the murderers from the law-abiding citizens.
quote:Why would you need it if you've already determined everyone a suspect for murder?
Unfortunately, today's police force don't have unified mind-reading abilities capable of identifying the murderers from the law-abiding citizens
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:07 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Unfortunately, today's police apparently lack the capability of knowing a suspect's general identifying characteristics when called to a location (e.g., Are we looking for a man, or are we looking for a woman?). That would be helpful in filtering out law-abiding citizens.
You know . . . so they don't get killed in the process.
You know.... you deliberately keep ignoring the fact the police were not told who had committed the domestic violence so they didn't know whether it was a man or a woman who committed it.
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:09 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:
the police were not told who had committed the domestic violence
It's been posted several times in this thread with links, yes they had been told.
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:09 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:With or without goggles, I see what they are.
You probably don't even know what Robert's Rules of Order are and will have to goggle them.
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:10 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:
It's frightening that people like you actually exist who want murderers to be able to refuse to identify themselves when the police stop them on suspicion that they committed a minor crime.
This was an innocent man, not a murderer.
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:10 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
Why would you need it if you've already determined everyone a suspect for murder?
What logic did you use to reach your brilliant conclusion that the police have already determined everyone is a suspect for murder?
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:11 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:You tell me, I was quoting you.
Why would you need it if you've already determined everyone a suspect for murder?
What logic did you use to reach your brilliant conclusion that the police have already determined everyone is a suspect for murder?
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:12 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:There are no innocent men in dawgcrap's world of freedom.
This was an innocent man
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:15 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
This was an innocent man, not a murderer.
We're not talking about just the person in this specific case.
If, as you want, the police aren't given the legal authority to detain someone suspected of committing even a minor crime until their identity is determined then murderers and violent criminals will be able to refuse to identify themselves and not be detained until their identity is determined.
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:17 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
There are no innocent men in dawgcrap's world of freedom.
There are only innocent men in TX Tigercrap's sophistic world of freedom.
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:18 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:
DawgfaninCa
How goes the battle? Looks like you are getting manhandled and crushed to death in here!
BTW, I already explained that you are NOT REQUIRED TO SHOW AN ID, only to ID yourself when asked by police. Unless you are in a car.
The cops routinely ask for an ID card when harassing pedestrians, and they do so knowing it is not a requirement to carry an ID, and that it is MORE LIKELY to cause a conflict. They want conflict. They need a reason to crush people to death.
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:19 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
What logic did you use to reach your brilliant conclusion that the police have already determined everyone is a suspect for murder?
quote:
You tell me, I was quoting you.
Paranoid illogic.
Posted on 3/3/14 at 5:19 pm to DawgfaninCa
quote:Innocent until proven guilty. ABSOLUTELY.
There are only innocent men in TX Tigercrap's sophistic world of freedom.
Page 40 of 58
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News