• 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!

"Please! I don't have insurance!"

Police should've protected businesses more.

  • Need more info

    Votes: 1 16.7%

  • Yes, Police should've done whatever they could to protect business

    Votes: 5 83.3%

  • No, non interference was the only way

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    6
  • Poll closed .
Glitch said:
Violating the law is not "protesting peacefully." When there are a lot of people violating the law it is called a riot, not a protest. You clearly need an education in the proper use of the word "protest." You are as bad as the enemy of the people who know they are rioting but choose to deliberately lie and claim they were "peacefully protesting."

Here are a few tips to clear up your indoctrinated confusion:

  • If they are throwing rocks or bottles, they are rioting not protesting;
  • If they destroy the property of others, they are rioting not protesting;
  • If they are blocking traffic, they are rioting not protesting;
  • If they are violating the law in any manner, they are rioting not protesting.

What we have been witnessing nationwide are Democrat incited riots, not protests.
Click to expand...

You completely missed the intent of my post in your zeal to lump the looters in with the peaceful protesters. I understand Trump's brigade must regurgitate the Fox News talking points, but it makes your post look rather uninformed and partisan. Which of course it very much is.
 
yankintx said:
You completely missed the intent of my post in your zeal to lump the looters in with the peaceful protesters. I understand Trump's brigade must regurgitate the Fox News talking points, but it makes your post look rather uninformed and partisan. Which of course it very much is.
Click to expand...

I understood your intent completely. You want to make excuses for those who violate the law and deliberately lie by calling them "peaceful protesters." The reason you only find your "peaceful protesters" destroying the property of others is because they are always in Democrat-controlled sh*tholes where they are protected. There are no "peaceful protesters" destroying property or harming people in Alaska, because we don't play your leftist game. We actually enforce the law in Alaska and arrest the violent leftist rioters. It is pathetic you can't say the same, but I have come to expect as much from anti-American leftist scum.
 
mrdeltoid said:
Has anybody made a positive move toward resolution, other than repeating the obvious? If we look at police shootings the number has trended down for the last three years. Not saying all is well, but there is plenty of blame to go around. Police bring their life experience to every call. Keep in mind, they get attacked on a pretty regular basis. Most of them show remarkable restraint. There will always be racist cops. All we can do is deal with them. If they break the law, then they become criminals, and should be treated as such.
Click to expand...

Ah, the bad apple argument.

2DED63A5-2AA1-4359-8CEE-29C03D42B0EA.jpg
 
Police are not the enemy though a small percentage are egomaniacs who abuse their authority.
 
ecofarm said:
Now Trumpers are pro irresponsible business practice? Nothing's a surprise anymore.
Click to expand...

hello! trump is their leader!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

why on earth are you surprised?
 
trixare4kids said:
Are you sure you don't have a little bit of conservatism in you? ;)
Click to expand...

Nope! Just a responsible adult who would have insurance for their insurance if they could. I don’t mess around when it comes to insurance. Homeowners, auto, health, vision, etc. I am over insured, if anything.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Those are different forms of (business) insurance coverage - one is liability (relatively inexpensive) and the other is comprehensive (full?) coverage (which is more costly).
Click to expand...

And? :shrug:

It’s the cost of admission to own a business. If you elect not to be insured, you can’t complain when you lose everything. You were given the opportunity to cover your business, and chose not to do so.
 
Outlook said:
SEE THIS RESPONSE!!
This is the response of someone who hates humanity. This is someone who has no compassion.
This is someone who praises the looters and rioters.

This business owner now has no livelihood. He has no income to feed his family.
The community has no store.
People of all races suffered because of this violence.
Click to expand...


Hyperbole Man to the Rescue!

:lol:

So because I think someone should be insured, I hate humanity. :lol:

I love this forum. There is never a day that goes by that I am not surprised by the idiocy of some of the posts that I see.
 
Superfly said:
Maybe he should have had insurance? That’s the first thing he should have done as a responsible business owner.
Click to expand...

At least we agree that there should be no judgment on behalf of Floyd's family because he should have had life insurance. That is the first thing every responsible person should do. Any financial hardship is 100% Floyd's fault for being so irresponsible he didn't have insurance.
 
Outlook said:
SEE THIS RESPONSE!!
This is the response of someone who hates humanity. This is someone who has no compassion.
This is someone who praises the looters and rioters.

This business owner now has no livelihood. He has no income to feed his family.
The community has no store.
People of all races suffered because of this violence.
Click to expand...

That has to be one of the stupidest and most dishonest attempts to score an internet point I've seen in a while. Ugly too.



It actually is pretty reckless not to insure property. I can't imagine owning my house and thinking, "eh, I'll just hope really hard something bad does not happen." Noting that it is not wise to run a business and not insure it in no way condones protesting.

And "hates humanity"? "No compassion"? I can barely hear you, all the way up there on that horse.
 
Superfly said:
Hyperbole Man to the Rescue!

:lol:

So because I think someone should be insured, I hate humanity. :lol:

I love this forum. There is never a day that goes by that I am not surprised by the idiocy of some of the posts that I see.
Click to expand...


Dah dah. You make a lot of sense. You don’t condemn the rioters for looting and burning, instead we will condemn the business for not having insurance.
How many millions in a fund to release prisoners that caused the damage? Why not use that money to help small business rebuild so the people in the low income communities will have business to go to. Liberals are suppose to be compassionate, right LOL.
 
Superfly said:
And? :shrug:

It’s the cost of admission to own a business. If you elect not to be insured, you can’t complain when you lose everything. You were given the opportunity to cover your business, and chose not to do so.
Click to expand...

Another thing we agree on is that the federal government should provide NO financial assistance of any kind in any natural disaster nor should there be ANY stimulus money. Anyone whose home is destroyed in a flood or hurricane is 100% at fault for electing to not having insurance. So we are in complete agreement that the government should never provide any aid to anyone if they could have had insurance to cover the lose.

There also is zero reason the government should EVER pay for anyone medical expenses. If they elected not to have insurance then it's all on them. So this is another thing we agree on.

Then again a lot of people who know absolutely NOTHING about having a business has any clue that most businesses can not afford nor otherwise obtain business insurance.

Curious that you believe anyone should be able to burn down your house and it wouldn't matter because you have insurance. However, since he's an non-white Iraqi there is no reason to expect you would give a damn what happened to him anyway. Probably just another of those foreign Muslims so there was more than one reason to burn his business down, wasn't there? I gather from your messages that is at the core of why you cheer his business being destroyed.
 
Still another thread again showing why the Democratic Party should be declared a domestic terrorist organization and progressivism = Nazism.

White progressive Democrat fascists are promoting destroying non-Aryan white owned businesses to try to drive non-whites out of their cities. This is the Democratic Party's Nazi "Night of the Broken Glass" against non-whites in their cities. That is what is REALLY going on and why their Democratic police forces allow burning down such businesses - while drawing police lines to protect wealthy white areas of the city.

Nationwide, Democratic mayors and Democratic appointed police chiefs are allowing and therefore causing the looting, destruction and burning on non-white Aryan businesses and the businesses that employ large numbers of non-Aryans. Their tactics are identical to that of the Nazis - inflaming the mob rule riots themselves - and then blaming it on others.

White Democrats have been doing this from the very beginning of the Democratic Party - non-stop terrorizing black communities to try to drive them off. I have yet to read even ONE white Democrat on this forum objecting to burning out the businesses owned by or that significantly employed non-white people. Most white Democrats are more racist than Southern slave owners. They only difference is they try to deny it trying to use reverse logic.

The obvious is obvious. Minority owned businesses are only being destroyed and burned in Democratic run cities. This is the only place doing so is allowed by the government. Republicans have always had to try to stop Democrats from attacking minorities - and continue to do so. Republican officials are protecting the minority owned and employing businesses in their cities - while Democratic officials are against having non-white areas of their cities destroyed to drive of non-white people.
 
Last edited:
Superfly said:
Maybe he should have had insurance? That’s the first thing he should have done as a responsible business owner.
Click to expand...

yeah cuz when lefty needs to emote they need to kill black men and burn businsess down. He definitely should have had lefty anger management insurance. Everyone knows lefties can't control themselves.
 
joko104 said:
Still another thread again showing why the Democratic Party should be declared a domestic terrorist organization and progressivism = Nazism.

White progressive Democrat fascists are promoting destroying non-Aryan white owned businesses to try to drive non-whites out of their cities. That is what is REALLY going on and why their Democratic police forces allow burning down such businesses - while drawing police lines to protect wealthy white areas of the city.

White Democrats have been doing this from the very beginning of the Democratic Party - non-stop terrorizing black communities to try to drive them off. I have yet to read even ONE white Democrat on this forum objecting to burning out the businesses owned by or that significantly employed non-white people. Most white Democrats are more racist than Southern slave owners. They only difference is they try to deny it trying to use reverse logic.

The obvious is obvious. Minority owned businesses are only being destroyed and burned in Democratic run cities. This is the only place doing so is allowed by the government. Republicans have always had to try to stop Democrats from attacking minorities - and continue to do so.
Click to expand...

wow! you have some fetish for democrats. YOu used that word nearly 10 times in your post.
 
Integrityrespec said:
Non interference, commonly referred to as appeasement got us Adolf Hitler and WWII.
Click to expand...

Her point is all the fuss about the destruction of Jews businesses in Germany in the Night of the Broken Glass and otherwise has no basis whatsoever. Her claim is those Jews should have had insurance and since they didn't they had absolutely nothing to complain about. Indeed, i her message the loses were entirely those Jews fault from irresponsibly not having insurance.

The same declared agenda goals of the Democratic Party now are 100% identical to the declared economic and governmental agenda goals of Hitler and the Nazi fascists. Read up on it sometime. There is no difference. The target of the Democratic Party, like Nazism, remains all non-white people as well. Therefore, it is predictable many Democrats will use Nazi logic, Nazi excuses, Nazi rationalizations and support of Nazi tactics .
 
madman said:
wow! you have some fetish for democrats. YOu used that word nearly 10 times in your post.
Click to expand...

A political forum may not be the place for you.

Yes, I incessantly post against the new corporate-fascist domestic terrorism political party, ie American Nazi Party that the Democratic Party has become. I often posted that the Democratic Party is where the Nazi Party in Germany was in the mid 1930s. The Democratic Party has now moved to mob violence and destruction on the same time line as the Nazi's did. The Democratic Party is to the USA what the Nazi Party was to Germany in 1937.
 
I have often posted I like and respect liberals. I have often posted I don't like the Republican Party. To this, I also post of how intensely I despise the progressive Democratic Party and progressivism, which for every agenda and goal is corporate-fascism - which is exactly what Nazism was - the marriage of wealthy corporations to government, using the tactic of non-stop race-baiting, fear mongering and hate mongering. The rioters are their Brown shirts. The police in Nazi Germany did nothing to protect minority businesses just like the police in Democratic run cities did nothing to protect minority businesses.

My intense opposition to the NEW progressive (Nazi) Democratic Party is because I vehemently oppose Nazis / corporate fascists. In this, I see most progressive Democrats as a deadly (murderous) force not only against the country, but against people. They they gain true power Americans will be executed by the millions, imprisoned and tortured by the millions, and the rest of most people living in terror of their secret police and storm troopers. It has reached a point that to get anyone's business destroyed, to get anyone so terrorized (deliberately) they dare not leave their homes (with such as Maxine Waters declaring that goal) that all it takes is the fascist propaganda outlets of the MSM to name anyone as the enemy putting both mobs and violent sociopaths out to destroy them. The Democratic party is the party of racism, slavery, destruction, death and war.
 
Mr Person said:
That has to be one of the stupidest and most dishonest attempts to score an internet point I've seen in a while. Ugly too.



It actually is pretty reckless not to insure property. I can't imagine owning my house and thinking, "eh, I'll just hope really hard something bad does not happen." Noting that it is not wise to run a business and not insure it in no way condones protesting.

And "hates humanity"? "No compassion"? I can barely hear you, all the way up there on that horse.
Click to expand...

It's more reckless for people to not have medical insurance. The government shouldn't spend $1 on anyone's medical care. It is all their fault.

The government shouldn't spend $1 on anyone who loses their home and possessions to a flood, wild fire or hurricane either. It's their fault for not having insurance.

You also agree with me there should be no SS disability coverage nor unemployment for anyone who loses a job to an injury. It is 100% their fault for not having an insurance policy such as Aflac.

Also, no one shot by anyone in the chest or head has anything to complain about - regardless of by the police or not. If that person had been wearing body armor and a ballistic helmet as insurance, they would not have been seriously harmed.

There is NEVER any basis for an auto accident lawsuits. If the person did not have enough insurance to cover the loses that is entirely on the person. Don't think about suing someone who hits you and hurts you and your family. It is YOUR fault if you don't have enough insurance to cover all economic loses of any kind. Injury lawsuits should be prohibited. That's what insurance is for.

The same would be true if anyone was burning political HQs. They should have insurance so suffer no loses. Any lose of voter info and canvasing lost is irrelevant, just as it is irrelevant if a business loses business records. All that matters is having insurance. Unless someone is harmed physically burglary, robbery, looting and arson are all victimless crimes to you, Superfly and many other Democrats on this forum - for which the only person to blame and in the wrong - if anyone - is if the person or business didn't have enough insurance.

No one should ever complain they can't afford a lawyer either nor should one be provided. They should have had legal insurance and if they don't then not having a lawyer is entirely their own fault.

Once again, you should stop claiming you are a lawyer. No lawyer would take your position on this topic. In fact, lawyers insist in civil matters that the jury should be prohibited from even hearing if the person had insurance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom