• 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!

NYPD Cops Investigated For Allegedly Pistol-Whipping Unarmed Teen (VIDEO)

No, that's an authoritarian. You should probably learn the difference.

So, criminals are in no way responsible for their own conduct?
 
So, criminals are in no way responsible for their own conduct?

Did I say that? Is lying and dishonesty all you have left for arguments? Pathetic form of debate.

Police cannot beat up unarmed, nonthreatening suspects. Only an authoritarian would argue otherwise.
 
Did I say that? Is lying and dishonesty all you have left for arguments? Pathetic form of debate.

Police cannot beat up unarmed, nonthreatening suspects. Only an authoritarian would argue otherwise.

I said,

A great Conservative--me--is saying that, at some point the perp has to look at his actions, when he's pissed off about a cop whipping his ass.

Then you said,

No, that's an authoritarian. You should probably learn the difference.

Notice the, "no" you wrote.

Don't ever call me a liar again.
 
Possibly, but it doesn't need to be random, it just needs to be a gross overreaction. Which, by everything given here, this case is most certainly is. The cops don't just get to beat you up to any degree they want just because they suspect you of crime.

Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, or did you forget that one? Authoritarians often do.

Cops are called, "law enforcement officers", for a reason.
 
Cops are called, "law enforcement officers", for a reason.

Yes, that doesn't mean they are KGB, they cannot assault people for no reason, it must be in response to force against them first. Duh.

Man, big government authoritarians sure don't seem to understand the basics of freedom.
 
Don't ever call me a liar again.

Don't base your arguments on lies and intellectual dishonesty and I won't. But if you use liar tactics, I'll call your argument out for being a lying, dishonest heap of horse dung. Choice is yours.
 
Yes, that doesn't mean they are KGB, they cannot assault people for no reason, it must be in response to force against them first. Duh.

Man, big government authoritarians sure don't seem to understand the basics of freedom.

In this case, they had a reason.
 
Don't base your arguments on lies and intellectual dishonesty and I won't. But if you use liar tactics, I'll call your argument out for being a lying, dishonest heap of horse dung. Choice is yours.

Dom't make comments, then start insulting people when you get called on them.
 
Dom't make comments, then start insulting people when you get called on them.

I'm not insulting you, I'm talking about your dishonest arguments you have employed here. Don't US dishonest, lying debate strategies and I won't call them out. Pretty simple.
 
In this case, they had a reason.

What's the reason for felony assault against an unarmed and nonthreatening suspect?
 
What's the reason for felony assault against an unarmed and nonthreatening suspect?

Who gets to decide if a perp is threatening, or not?
 
A cop has NO say, at the scene?

They get their day in court, they get to give their side. Are you unaware of how this process works?
 
Back
Top Bottom