• 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!

One NYPD Cop Dead, Another Critical After They Were Shot in Vehicle[W:132]

Re: One NYPD Cop Dead, Another Critical After They Were Shot in Vehicle

As to Giffords. You don't have to remind me. I remember it all to well. I also can happily link to my comments then. And even before we knew factually that Loughner had nothing to do with the Tea Party and had no seeming care or support for Sarah Palin, my stance was it was asinine, dishonest, hackish, and absurd to blame the tea party or Sarah Palin for the shooting or to even suggest they're culpable or responsible for the shooting happening. Sarah Palin and the various tea party groups did not openly and honestly advocate for violence, were not in any literal sense inciting people to commit a crime, and even in the hypothetical at the time that he was spurred by their comments I still felt it would have been ridiculous to blame them...and it was amazingly irresponsible for the media to keep jumping to that conclusion.

The difference here is that I'm not magically changing my opinion and my stance on that kind of issue simply because Al Sharpton is a putz, I disagree with much of this movement while I agree with much of the Tea Party movement, and because politically this issue is about "the enemy" rather than "my team".

It was ridiculous to massively give blame and wrongfully attack people, especially using outright falsehoods, for the actual SHOOTING then, and it is ridiculous to do it now. In both instances if you want to have a realistic conversation about the potential enflaming of peoples emotions and providing an atmosphere that is conducive to crazy people getting crazy ideas...that's reasonable. But that's a LARGE difference between directly blaming or claiming someones words or actions...that in no way, shape, or form openly and honestly called for illegal activity...contributed to the actual illegal act.

No, and if it came off that I was insinuating that I apologize...But there are those in here that were arguing at that time and have jumped to the completely opposite argument to suit their political agenda, if that makes any sense...I am trying to look at this rationally. I don't like Sharpton either...He is a race hustler, and a two bit shakedown artist....How he ever got a show on any TV program is beyond me....But at least for the part of linking the "Dead Cop" part of this to him, it appears the evidence shows that is not the case.
 
Re: One NYPD Cop Dead, Another Critical After They Were Shot in Vehicle

The state collectivist left's 'bloodless' revolution hasn't been quite as successful as they'd hoped.

in fact, it's hit a brick wall.

Despite his spoken and unspoken promises and soaring 'hopeful' rhetoric, their last best hope for 'fundamental transformation' failed them. Spectacularly. Despite decades of national media infiltration, despite decades of infiltrating the nation's education systems, America, perhaps now fully awake, has rejected their authoritarianism and flagrant, prolific deceit, and reduced their voices in US and most state governments to an impotent murmur.

They are disillusioned, disgusted, disappointed, and in complete disarray... their only remaining option is to become dangerous.

are they, right in front of your eyes, exploiting blacks to escalate their 'revolution' from bloodless to bloody?

Insane? or something to ponder in New Amerika?
 
Last edited:
Re: One NYPD Cop Dead, Another Critical After They Were Shot in Vehicle

No, and if it came off that I was insinuating that I apologize

And no, you didn't specifically come off that way. I'll admit I'm potentially a bit defensive as well, since others have been flat out insinuating that because I'm a conservative I'm somehow wrong or a traitor or not REALLY a conservative for actually treating this situation the same way that I treated pretty much every other past instance where people tried to blame the speech of others for a horrible act.

But there are those in here that were arguing at that time and have jumped to the completely opposite argument to suit their political agenda

There are some that probably were...but most of the people participating on these threads weren't here talking about the gabby giffords thing to be quite honest. The few that were, I've had no issue pointing out their hypocrisy just as I've been doing on the other side. I won't mention the name because I don't remembe if it was this thread or another, but I actually flat out linked to a particular members post where he was doing the very thing he was railing against someone for doing here.

But you have to admit...the whole "argued at that time and have jumped ot the completel yopposite arguement" notion is pretty applicable to people across the aisles at this point.
 
You do have the right to fight a cop.

Um, no one has "the right to fight a cop".

People have a "right to self defense" if someone is unlawfully physically threaten them. If that person unlawfully physically threatening someone is a cop, then sure, you have the right to self defense against that person.

However there's no inherent "right to fight a cop", full stop.
 
Um, no one has "the right to fight a cop".

People have a "right to self defense" if someone is unlawfully physically threaten them. If that person unlawfully physically threatening someone is a cop, then sure, you have the right to self defense against that person.

However there's no inherent "right to fight a cop", full stop.

The Declaration of Independence would seem to indicate otherwise.
 
The Declaration of Independence would seem to indicate otherwise.

Could you quote me exactly where the declaration of independence suggests one has a "right to fight a cop"?
 
Re: One NYPD Cop Dead, Another Critical After They Were Shot in Vehicle

And no, you didn't specifically come off that way. I'll admit I'm potentially a bit defensive as well, since others have been flat out insinuating that because I'm a conservative I'm somehow wrong or a traitor or not REALLY a conservative for actually treating this situation the same way that I treated pretty much every other past instance where people tried to blame the speech of others for a horrible act.



There are some that probably were...but most of the people participating on these threads weren't here talking about the gabby giffords thing to be quite honest. The few that were, I've had no issue pointing out their hypocrisy just as I've been doing on the other side. I won't mention the name because I don't remembe if it was this thread or another, but I actually flat out linked to a particular members post where he was doing the very thing he was railing against someone for doing here.

But you have to admit...the whole "argued at that time and have jumped ot the completel yopposite arguement" notion is pretty applicable to people across the aisles at this point.

Yeah, you got a point there....But then so goes the dance of political debate these day eh?
 
You do? Could you show me in the Constitution where that exists? Or maybe it is in statute?

You have to right to self defense... even if it's a cop.

So yeah, you have the right to fight a cop.
 
You have to right to self defense... even if it's a cop.

So yeah, you have the right to fight a cop.

You have to prove self defense, your odds are better playing the lottery.
 
Re: One NYPD Cop Dead, Another Critical After They Were Shot in Vehicle

The state collectivist left's 'bloodless' revolution hasn't been quite as successful as they'd hoped.

in fact, it's hit a brick wall.

Despite his spoken and unspoken promises and soaring 'hopeful' rhetoric, their last best hope for 'fundamental transformation' failed them. Spectacularly. Despite decades of national media infiltration, despite decades of infiltrating the nation's education systems, America, perhaps now fully awake, has rejected their authoritarianism and flagrant, prolific deceit, and reduced their voices in US and most state governments to an impotent murmur.

They are disillusioned, disgusted, disappointed, and in complete disarray... their only remaining option is to become dangerous.

are they, right in front of your eyes, exploiting blacks to escalate their 'revolution' from bloodless to bloody?

Insane? or something to ponder in New Amerika?

:roll:
 
You have to prove self defense, your odds are better playing the lottery.

Agreed. It's your word against the cop's. Very low probability of success.
 
You have to right to self defense... even if it's a cop.

So yeah, you have the right to fight a cop.

No, that means you have a right to self defense, even if it's a cop

A right to fight a cop would suggest you can go right a cop for any reason

I have a right to self defense against a 95 year old cripple women. Does that mean I have a "right to fight a 95 year old crippled woman"?
 
No, that means you have a right to self defense, even if it's a cop

A right to fight a cop would suggest you can go right a cop for any reason

I have a right to self defense against a 95 year old cripple women. Does that mean I have a "right to fight a 95 year old crippled woman"?

...whatever. Not sure why you're trying to be specific. My point is clear. The entire idea that you can't fight back against the cops is not true. Depending on the circumstance, you can indeed fight a cop.

Thus, you have the right to fight a cop (circumstances depending).
 
You have to right to self defense... even if it's a cop.

So yeah, you have the right to fight a cop.

You are making no sense...Once an officer tells you to place your hands behind your back, and that you are under arrest, you either do it, or you are resisting arrest and will be taken down. To attack the cop trying to arrest you is NOT self defense by any standard.
 
...whatever. Not sure why you're trying to be specific. My point is clear. The entire idea that you can't fight back against the cops is not true. Depending on the circumstance, you can indeed fight a cop.

Thus, you have the right to fight a cop (circumstances depending).

Well, go ahead if you want to, but let me just say it will not end well for you if you do.
 
...whatever. Not sure why you're trying to be specific. My point is clear. The entire idea that you can't fight back against the cops is not true. Depending on the circumstance, you can indeed fight a cop.

Thus, you have the right to fight a cop (circumstances depending).

Eric Garner's and Michael Brown's circumstances didn't fit any criteria that would allow someone to assault a cop.
 
Back
Top Bottom