• 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!

Man Who Filmed Cop Choking Eric Garner Was Indicted (Video).....

Geoist said:
Some liberals, like myself, believe cigarettes should remain legal. However, taxation and regulation may be justified. Therefore, in the case of selling cigarettes illegally, a fine is sufficient... not a chokehold.
Click to expand...

The chokehold had nothing to do with him selling cigarettes, it was due to him resisting arrest. Is the left still using that busted canard? Hey, liberals, got news for you, it was your guy who put these cig policies and laws into place. Don't like em, change em. In the meantime, the police will be doing their jobs.
 
clownboy said:
The chokehold had nothing to do with him selling cigarettes, it was due to him resisting arrest.
Click to expand...

I do not believe the selling of cigarettes should be grounds for arrest.


Hey, liberals, got news for you, it was your guy who put these cig policies and laws into place.
Click to expand...

They aren't "my guys."
 
Geoist said:
I do not believe the selling of cigarettes should be grounds for arrest.




They aren't "my guys."
Click to expand...

Well then, you don't believe in it, oh we should do a national press conference letting every officer in the nation know they should no longer use the laws on the books, but instead consult you to see what you believe in. Hell of a standard. And if you're a liberal, they're your guys.
 
Chaddelamancha said:
I don't have a particularly unique definition of criminal outside of the standard law enforcement definition.
Click to expand...



crim·i·nal (krm-nl)
adj.
1. Of, involving, or having the nature of crime: criminal abuse.
2. Relating to the administration of penal law.
3.
a. Guilty of crime.
b. Characteristic of a criminal.
4. Shameful; disgraceful: a criminal waste of talent.





so definition 2, indicates anyone who has committed a crime.


Should non-violent drug offenders be "off the streets"?
 
Yes.

I say that, but it is with a caveat. Everything just isn't black and white.


ReverendHellh0und said:
crim·i·nal (krm-nl)
adj.
1. Of, involving, or having the nature of crime: criminal abuse.
2. Relating to the administration of penal law.
3.
a. Guilty of crime.
b. Characteristic of a criminal.
4. Shameful; disgraceful: a criminal waste of talent.





so definition 2, indicates anyone who has committed a crime.


Should non-violent drug offenders be "off the streets"?
Click to expand...
 
Chaddelamancha said:
Yes.

I say that, but it is with a caveat. Everything just isn't black and white.
Click to expand...



The prison for profit industry is pleased with your answer.


;)


In all seriousness, if there is a victimless crime, "off the streets" means our burden on the prison system and our taxes. Release all non violent drug offenders and decriminalize free choice.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
The prison for profit industry is pleased with your answer.


;)


In all seriousness, if there is a victimless crime, "off the streets" means our burden on the prison system and our taxes. Release all non violent drug offenders and decriminalize free choice.
Click to expand...

That's peachy, but until you manage to pry the nanny staters away from their sin tax revenue it's still going to be against the law and subject to enforcement. And again you seem to need to be reminded, this wasn't Gardner's first rodeo, it was his 32cd. At one point, when you continue to violate the same law, jail time gets added to the fines.
 
clownboy said:
That's peachy, but until you manage to pry the nanny staters away from their sin tax revenue it's still going to be against the law and subject to enforcement. And again you seem to need to be reminded, this wasn't Gardner's first rodeo, it was his 32cd. At one point, when you continue to violate the same law, jail time gets added to the fines.
Click to expand...


Dude was jumped, over a misdemeanor, suspicion of selling loose cigarettes. Speaking of law, where was the articulation of reasonable suspicion?
 
Hatuey said:
His wife is getting it too. She got arrested for allegedly slapping somebody at a grocery store... People who make the NYPD look bad don't last long.
Click to expand...

Orta, 22, is no stranger to trouble, sources said. He has been arrested 27 times since 2009 for offenses ranging from fare evasion and pot possession to a robbery in May. He was also busted twice for gun possession and in January 2013 he was charged with menacing with a gun.
Click to expand...

Maybe they're just criminals.

:shrug:
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Dude was jumped, over a misdemeanor, suspicion of selling loose cigarettes. Speaking of law, where was the articulation of reasonable suspicion?
Click to expand...

We know he was met by an undercover officer earlier. We still do not know all the details. Perhaps someday soon we will. And this was the 32cd time at that same misdemeanor. I bolded that because you seem to ignore it at every turn.
 
clownboy said:
We know he was met by an undercover officer earlier. We still do not know all the details. Perhaps someday soon we will. And this was the 32cd time at that same misdemeanor. I bolded that because you seem to ignore it at every turn.
Click to expand...



I don't care if it was his 100th time, it should't have resulted in jock cops jumping him.


Speaking of, this was officer choke holds at least 3rd time he's been involved in questionable behavior?

So much so the NYPD made a payout.... if you wish to consider priors of one, you need to consider the priors of all.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I don't care if it was his 100th time, it should't have resulted in jock cops jumping him.


Speaking of, this was officer choke holds at least 3rd time he's been involved in questionable behavior?

So much so the NYPD made a payout.... if you wish to consider priors of one, you need to consider the priors of all.
Click to expand...

Who knows. Maybe Garner was being harassed the other 30 something times and arrested every time he had his own personal cigerettes. :p Hence why he was tired of being bothered. (i dont actually believe this i think he was a loosey peddler but thats not the point) But i mean who knows?
 
clownboy said:
Well then, you don't believe in it, oh we should do a national press conference letting every officer in the nation know they should no longer use the laws on the books, but instead consult you to see what you believe in. Hell of a standard. And if you're a liberal, they're your guys.
Click to expand...

I never said cops shouldn't follow the law. But I do have a problem with the way some of them enforce the law.
 
b_dubz said:
Ummmmm if the cops where following him and harassing him (which I'm quite sure they were) that would be all the more reason to carry a gun.

The only reason he's a idiot is for not shooting at them when they came at him. That would have been the most logical decision. Fire off some rounds and get the F*** outta their!

Well people should listen to their teachers when they have good ones, unfortunately in inner city school systems their are not many left because of the absurd burdens put on them by the state (like making them buy their own supply's out of their check, or punishing them for students drawing in textbooks) this sort of policy trickles down to the students, and makes the teachers very apathetic. I have had teachers that allowed students to play Xbox all day in class. I had a history teacher that was using textbooks from 1988 in 2003 when their were fresh ones in the basement. Why would I listen to her?

No one should listen to the pigs. They should be jailed, fined, and forced to do community service depending on the pig. I bet theirs around 5 good pigs per state...

Well it is technically illegal. People sell single cigarettes on the corners in all the city's up here. Its illegal anywhere, not just NYC or Boston or Philly. Just people don't do it elsewhere...
Click to expand...
I see you troll in multiple threads.

Furthermore this whole "nanny state" idea is absurd. An mirage made by fox news and other cons...

In the instance of selling loose cigarettes they are protecting tobacco company's, not trying to help the people...
Click to expand...
How would the police arrest of a man selling their product help the tobacco companies?

Please be specific.

The state does not do nearly enough to help the people. If they did we would have universal healthcare and education like the rest of the civilized world. They do plenty to protect the "free" market however to everybody's detriment...
Click to expand...
The state does not exist to give you free stuff. It is heading that way.

If you object then tell your state government representative and senator to petition the Congress for an Article V convention of states to propose amendments. You can be part of a solution necessary to fix the very great evil the federal government has become.
 
Geoist said:
I do not believe the selling of cigarettes should be grounds for arrest.
Click to expand...
okay.

New York state, back to the taxes here, New York state imposes a tax of $4.35 a pack, that's the highest of any state, and that's on top of the local New York City tax of $1.60, which is also the highest of any city. And the mayor, de Blasio, has just ordered the police to crack down on illegal cigarettes a few weeks before the Garner incident. He did that! Now de Blasio's running around, (saying) what happened?! Gee, this is outrageous, look at all this excessive force! Well, yeah, that's what you tax collectors, somebody had to mandate...​

Limbaugh has it right. Liberals tax something until it becomes profitable to participate in a black market. The police are told to enforce the laws because the city is broke. Liberalism is like that.

To stop the killing change the tax laws.
 
Chaddelamancha said:
It's been my experience that when you start name calling, you have lost the ability to be objective.

The problem I have with your thought here is that you are assuming the police force as a whole is corrupt. It's part of the 24-hour news cycle problem. All that is reported is whenever a police officer is caught doing something deemed inappropriate. Very rarely do you hear about the cops who are doing the most good. It just doesn't make for good television.
Click to expand...
Don't watch TV so that's not the issue.
I read.

The police are corrupt. I am speaking from personal expierence as well as my knowledge of history.

The real problem is all the stuff people are taught in school about history is skewed at best and just wrong at worst. With large portions omitted to make america look gold.
 
Misterveritis said:
I see you troll in multiple threads.


How would the police arrest of a man selling their product help the tobacco companies?

Please be specific.


The state does not exist to give you free stuff. It is heading that way.

If you object then tell your state government representative and senator to petition the Congress for an Article V convention of states to propose amendments. You can be part of a solution necessary to fix the very great evil the federal government has become.
Click to expand...
I think representative democracy and capitalism/classism are the real issue. Article v will only put off the systemic problems of America a lil bit longer.

Yes I'm trolling now, right...

Who do you think lobbied for those laws? The cigarette company's of course. Frankly I don't understand why, but I figure their reasoning is they don't want other people making money off their product. Single cigs are purchased at 20 bucks a pack. They probably figure they make more if people buy packs and smoke more.
 
b_dubz said:
I think representative democracy and capitalism/classism are the real issue. Article v will only put off the systemic problems of America a lil bit longer.

Yes I'm trolling now, right...

Who do you think lobbied for those laws? The cigarette company's of course. Frankly I don't understand why, but I figure their reasoning is they don't want other people making money off their product. Single cigs are purchased at 20 bucks a pack. They probably figure they make more if people buy packs and smoke more.
Click to expand...

I had a dream. Where people could get single cigerettes on a street corner for 25 cents or 3 for 50.
 
b_dubz said:
Who do you think lobbied for those laws? The cigarette company's of course. Frankly I don't understand why, but I figure their reasoning is they don't want other people making money off their product. Single cigs are purchased at 20 bucks a pack. They probably figure they make more if people buy packs and smoke more.
Click to expand...
I just shake my head.
 
Do you have some actual facts that show every police officer/department to be corrupt? How about we make it easier and say half of every department is corrupt.

Let's see, you refer to them as pigs which tells me you have to respect for them, and you believe they are corrupt citing your personal experience as evidence. Color me surprised.


b_dubz said:
Don't watch TV so that's not the issue.
I read.

The police are corrupt. I am speaking from personal expierence as well as my knowledge of history.

The real problem is all the stuff people are taught in school about history is skewed at best and just wrong at worst. With large portions omitted to make america look gold.
Click to expand...
 
Misterveritis said:
I just shake my head.
Click to expand...
Why? Because you don't want to admit the truth that our country was corrupted by corporations? Or that libertarianism and deregulation would be a HUGE windfall for company's?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom