• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’[W:254:298:850,989]

Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

No freedoms were lost, he broke the law. Sad day that you side with lawbreakers. You have NO credibility when speaking of the law. You're dismissed.

Hahahahaha, good job running away.
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

No freedoms were lost, he broke the law. Sad day that you side with lawbreakers. You have NO credibility when speaking of the law. You're dismissed.
Mans cattle was taken. That's how he makes a living. So, yea freedoms were impacted.
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

Possession harms the child. Sad you don't realize that, which makes my comments 100% CORRECT. Next time before making stupid comments why don't you talk to some victims of child molestation and ask them if possession that video of the crime harms them or not. They will say YES.

Yes, you made that argument in the other thread and it didn't make any sense then either.
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

Moderator's Warning:
The derailing is over. The topic is: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

Not other threads nor the discussion of possessing child porn. There should be no further responses to that topic here.

 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

Do you have a point?

Sure, the government came armed with guns and when meet with people armed with guns we find them bitching like little children all scared and **** of those people.
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

You make it sound like the government in this country is anything y other than regular citizens and elected officials. It's not a separate class of individuals. Public workers don't make a dime off that federal land. They just do their job and follow the law dictated by Congress. If conservatives are so worried about grazing rights get your conservative house to pass something changing how it's done.

Regular citizens stop being regular citizens when they become elected officials. And some elected officials believe in an authoritarian and all powerful central government while many of the citizens of this country do not. Furthermore, having been elected doesn't negate the peoples rights to stand up in opposition to govt when it gets out of hand.
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

Domestic terrorist is just going to end up being the new "racist" or "bigot" word to describe those you disagree with.
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

Sure, the government came armed with guns and when meet with people armed with guns we find them bitching like little children all scared and **** of those people.

Makes perfect sense. No, not really.
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

No freedoms were lost, he broke the law. Sad day that you side with lawbreakers. You have NO credibility when speaking of the law. You're dismissed.

Colorado is breaking the law....arrest it.
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

Regular citizens stop being regular citizens when they become elected officials. And some elected officials believe in an authoritarian and all powerful central government while many of the citizens of this country do not. Furthermore, having been elected doesn't negate the peoples rights to stand up in opposition to govt when it gets out of hand.

Did Mr. Bundy break the laws? Is the government enforcing laws you don't like justification for threatening the use of violence? At what point should citizens use violence or threaten the use of violence against their own government?

I'm not sure how enforcing laws on the books are "getting out of hand". The response the government has used is basically due to an armed "militia" showing up
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

Sure, the government came armed with guns and when meet with people armed with guns we find them bitching like little children all scared and **** of those people.

Link to support your bullsheet post please.
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

Colorado is breaking the law....arrest it.

The Federal government has a long history of prosecuting and ignoring state's marijuana laws. It wasn't too long ago that there were crackdowns in California marijuana dispensaries. Of course...unless unlike Bundy people are actually trying to start a movement to change federal marijuana laws.
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

That unnamed person never said "I will shoot law enforcement". For all you know, he could have been saying "We won't hesitate to shoot the cattle" or "We won't hesitate to shoot Bundy".

If he/she committed a crime, he/she would have been arrested by now.

If anyone in the Obama administration had ever committed any crime, they would have been arrested by now.
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

And I like how right wing loons only respect the laws they agree with. And if anybody tries to enforce a law they don't like, they are perfectly justified in killing them.

And just who has been killed by "right wing loons" in this situation, Wiggen?
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

Did Mr. Bundy break the laws? Is the government enforcing laws you don't like justification for threatening the use of violence? At what point should citizens use violence or threaten the use of violence against their own government?

I'm not sure how enforcing laws on the books are "getting out of hand". The response the government has used is basically due to an armed "militia" showing up

No, the armed militia was in response to the heavy handed tactics of the BLM. Furthermore, the armed militia had every right to be armed. The militia was completely within their rights...which is why the BLM backed down.

Do you think the police should be able to do anything they want to apprehend suspects?
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

If anyone in the Obama administration had ever committed any crime, they would have been arrested by now.

I didn't say anything about someone in the Obama administration committing a crime, did I? You may want to actually read posts before quoting them. Is Obama so much on your mind that you see him in posts when he isn't there?
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

If anyone in the Obama administration had ever committed any crime, they would have been arrested by now.

:rofl
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

The Federal government has a long history of prosecuting and ignoring state's marijuana laws. It wasn't too long ago that there were crackdowns in California marijuana dispensaries. Of course...unless unlike Bundy people are actually trying to start a movement to change federal marijuana laws.

Unless you'd like to restate this in comprehensible, I'm going to answer on the assumption that you were trying to make a point. It would appear that bundy feels the grazing fees are wrong despite being legal and is creating a movement to change them.

There are plenty of laws that were deemed unacceptable to the people and have been changed or just rescinded all together. The process of doing that has often started somewhat violently. Prohibition and slavery are great examples.
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

Unless you'd like to restate this in comprehensible, I'm going to answer on the assumption that you were trying to make a point. It would appear that bundy feels the grazing fees are wrong despite being legal and is creating a movement to change them.

There are plenty of laws that were deemed unacceptable to the people and have been changed or just rescinded all together. The process of doing that has often started somewhat violently. Prohibition and slavery are great examples.

You really wanna put grazing fees on the same level as slavery?
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

Unless you'd like to restate this in comprehensible, I'm going to answer on the assumption that you were trying to make a point. It would appear that bundy feels the grazing fees are wrong despite being legal and is creating a movement to change them.

There are plenty of laws that were deemed unacceptable to the people and have been changed or just rescinded all together. The process of doing that has often started somewhat violently. Prohibition and slavery are great examples.

You could obviously understand what I wrote. I apologize for not sufficiently proofreading before submitting my argument to some asshole over the internet.

It doesn't matter if Bundy likes or dislike the law. It's the law.

As far as using slavery as a "great example", the ending of Jim Crow is also another example where people used violence and intimidation to fight against federal laws they didn't like. So sometimes in retrospect we can judge the cause it never excuses the actual use or threatened use of force.
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

No, the armed militia was in response to the heavy handed tactics of the BLM. Furthermore, the armed militia had every right to be armed. The militia was completely within their rights...which is why the BLM backed down.

Do you think the police should be able to do anything they want to apprehend suspects?

I'm not sure I follow you're question. So you're saying that if I don't believe an armed militia should face down authorities I believe the police should be able to do anything they want?
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

But he would have been armed if he could have, MLK, Mr. Non-Violence, applied for a concealed weapon permit.
I thought you gun passionists were all about concealed carry--except MLK in your subliminal use of race of course.
In fact, it was the elderly Blacks in Chicago who won the right to CC in Illinois, the last state to ban it .
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

No, the armed militia was in response to the heavy handed tactics of the BLM.
And how many of these armed militia burned-out cowards do you think had state and federal warrants out for them?
Shouldn't they all have had to show their permits, since they are all honest and legal ?
 
Re: Reid calls Bundy supporters ‘domestic terrorists’

Mans cattle was taken. That's how he makes a living. So, yea freedoms were impacted.

Had he paid like he was supposed to BY LAW, they wouldn't have been. That's like complaining the county taking your house cause you refuse to pay taxes.
 
Back
Top Bottom