Socialism in WI?


1. Just because you have nothing to hide does not mean that they won't find anything.

2. "Jacobs said he hopes some searches will result in the discovery of guns they didn't know were in their own homes." Well that would actually be pretty damn cool - if I got to keep it!

3. "He said that there’s also a chance they’ll find guns linked to crimes." Well that will certainly encourage people to call to volunteer for searches. Oh, you found a murder weapon in my basement, officer? Hey, what are those handcuffs for?

4. I wonder if they would organize my reloading bench and supplies for me while they were at it?

Like I'm really going to INVITE the police into my house to search for anything.....
 
Why would anyone allow police to come in and search around their home without a legal search warrant? If people in Wisconsin allow this, they are weirder that I thought.
 
Link Removed

Now people are left with no choice but to search their own homes....I'm surprised they didn't come up with something like, "We encourage all residents to perform an exhaustive and comprehensive search of their homes and if they find any illegal firearms please bring them to your nearest law enforcement agency."
 
Link Removed

Now people are left with no choice but to search their own homes....I'm surprised they didn't come up with something like, "We encourage all residents to perform an exhaustive and comprehensive search of their homes and if they find any illegal firearms please bring them to your nearest law enforcement agency."

Ha! Right, and "If during your exhaustive search you should run across a pot seed or a coke vial that hasn't been used since 1979 and the residue was scraped clean (for the last and final time) in 1983, do as we would by beating the crap out of yourself, handcuff yourself, and volunteer a family member to drive you down to the station where we can charge you and seize your car, home and cash for non-judicial forfeiture under the auspices of the Constitution non-compliant 'war on drugs.'"

If I ain't got no warrant or can't find me some o' dat reasonably articulated suspisson, I ain't doin' no illegal searches on myself, period! LOL

There are people on this very site who have expressed their "faith" in police and the justice system today. I can't decide who's dumber - them or the idiot cop who put forth this idea.
_shrug__or__dunno__by_crula.gif


Blues
 
There are people on this very site who have expressed their "faith" in police and the justice system today. I can't decide who's dumber - them or the idiot cop who put forth this idea.
_shrug__or__dunno__by_crula.gif


Blues
Blues, I finally thought of a correlation to how I feel about cops, and why you (purposefully?) misunderstand it. Here goes.
-
Do you hate soldiers and sailors? I mean, if there is a war going on and you don't agree with it, do you hate the troops? Some do, I've seen it, so this is not intended to be sarcastic or funny. Under the auspices of war, are there soldiers that overstep their authority or abuse their power? Sure, but on the whole they will question or refuse unlawful orders - and happily or unhappily carry out the lawful orders of those they work for. If they are lucky, or have good bosses, they have the leeway to use common sense in the interpretation of those orders to adapt to situations not considered by the bosses, but usually they don't.
-
Now substitute "cop" for "soldier" and "laws" for "orders". I will just as equally form my decisions on the topics discussed here. Michael Brown vs Darren Wilson? The cop was IMHO justified in shooting the thug. Eric Garner vs NYC PD? The cops were out of line, but IMHO it all started with Nanny State laws (cigarette taxes) and the NYC Govt. should be submerged in a Big Gulp until they say uncle.
 
Blues, I finally thought of a correlation to how I feel about cops, and why you (purposefully?) misunderstand it. Here goes.

Do you hate soldiers and sailors?

I started an actual reply to this sophistry, but decided what's the point. How about you "purposefully" just be done with me like you are with the newcomer you've threatened to ignore what? Like three times now?

I'll give one reply to that idiocy:

The Nuremberg Trials were supposed to settle the issue of killing people because it's the law or because a soldier (or cop) was just following orders. If you're an example of what populates today's military, you're damned skippy I distrust them as intensely as I distrust cops. You aren't helping your case with that nonsense, specifically as it relates to Eric Garner. As far as I'm concerned, you're excusing murder, which makes you no better than the murderers in my estimation. Your "correlations" suck.

Blues
 
...specifically as it relates to Eric Garner. As far as I'm concerned, you're excusing murder, which makes you no better than the murderers in my estimation. Your "correlations" suck.
Blues
I guess you are just reading what you want to read into things. I have said:
The cops were out of line
Was it intentional murder as you state? Please. Wrongful death? Of Course.
Then I went on to speculate on the reason behind their crime.
it all started with Nanny State laws (cigarette taxes)
Do you deny this?
Interesting you bring up Nuremberg after I specifically said
Sure, but on the whole they will question or refuse unlawful orders
They do, I have.
-
Unfortunately (or fortunately) many experienced troops out there are commanded by young'uns just out of "Officer U" who have little or no experience and are frequently challenged when they don't consider the implications or lawfulness of an order, and they hopefully learn from this as they gain experience.
-
That said, if an order is lawful you carry it out.
-
The cops don't have this excuse, since they must have experience to be put in positions of leadership. The exception to this is patrol cops, who are unsupervised, and many are like the Junior Officers mentioned above. Some are fortunate enough to have a partner with experience to correct them. Those that don't, and act improperly, have no one to tell them it is wrong or immoral until it is too late.
-
The cops were supposedly just enforcing the "loosie" law. Whether or not they were, how they went about it was wrong. They were carrying out a "lawful" order, but in an unlawful manner. They were enforcing a law that caused all of these problems, from giving Garner the revenue opportunity of selling "loosies" to making the cops enforce a stupis a$$ law.
-
If you're an example of what populates today's military...
Wow. No words.
 
How about you "purposefully" just be done with me like you are with the newcomer you've threatened to ignore what? Like three times now?
Blues
On this - You and I agree on most things, and you have actually changed my mind on some things. I respect that. As far as I can tell the only thing that we disagree on is what I perceive as your irrational hatred of all cops. My reasons for not agreeing with you on this were stated above, and subsequently misconstrued by you.
-
The "newcomer" has been blocked, and for the following reasons: We agree on nothing, they refuse to have a civil debate on those things, and they have been identified as typical Progressive Liberals who spout talking points and will ignore facts. The reason I "threatened"(?) to block them before actually doing so is that I had the unreasonable expectation that they might actually give facts a second chance. Unlike some on here I NEVER care about how many posts someone has. Everyone on here has life experience beyond the number of posts they have made. Someone can make the best point in the world with their first post, others can reveal their ignorance and inability to process common sense in that same post.
 
You don't respect me whodat. Over and over and over again you replied "to" me in the Brown thread with side-issues of race and riots when the only thing I tried to focus on was the incident itself and subsequent legal issues. You accuse me through chickensh!t innuendo of "purposefully" misunderstanding you, whatever that means. I have never used the word "hate" towards anybody, and have described multitudes of times why I distrust cops. You have the gall to assert your wholly made-up "perceptions" of me when the truthful and accurate corrections of those perceptions are all over this forum, and in the same post say you respect me? Pffft.

The word "lawful" is meaningless anymore. There's nothing lawful about forcing a contact on someone for which no evidence exists that he was committing the petty crime he was ostensibly suspected of, then killing him, and then indicting the man who filmed the killing rather than the cop(s) who killed him! And Orta's arrest and indictment stink to high Heaven of pay-back, intended to take the spotlight off of Pantaleo (and the rest who got immunity for testifying for him at the GJ!) and paint Garner with some tenuous tag of consorting with felons through some twists and turns of pretzel-logic, further "justifying" Garner's death at the hands of the biggest, strongest, most brutal and unaccountable gang in the nation - cops.

From the top down, lawlessness reigns. Obama and Holder should stand without having to make a list of their lawlessness, but I'll oblige if one of the leftist hacks on this site wishes to challenge me on it. John Roberts rewrites an actual law to make it constitutional. Oscar Grant is shot in the back while lying face down in a train station having done absolutely nothing wrong. His killer got sentenced to two years, itself a woefully weak sentence, but only served one year and is a free man today. Cicinelli and Ramos got nothing for murdering Kelly Thomas even with Ramos caught on tape threatening to "F you up" with his "fists." From the President and Attorney General of the United States, down to the lowliest cop on the beat, corruption, lawlessness and unaccountability are the order of the day, and you assign "hatred" to me for seeing it, exposing it, talking about it and/or being totally disgusted by it and/or not trusting the purveyors of it? The question from you should be to yourself - where the Hell is your outrage? Why do you keep excusing cops and talking them up like they're some kind of Army of Saints? Where in the Constitution do you find it "lawful" to conduct stop and frisk programs on almost exclusively black neighborhoods over the last 25 or 30 years? The only reason you can say that such programs are "lawful" is because the same kind of lawless hacks as John Roberts dictated that it be so from their Oligarch's Chambers! Authority for such searches and forced contacts by the state upon citizens can't be found in reading the Constitution, that's for sure. The same holds true for DUI stops, Border Patrol stops, and the "Constitution-free zone" surrounding our borders for 100 miles inside them.

Your excuses that Pantaleo (and the rest) got off because they were acting "lawfully," again, makes you no better than them. Criticizing around the edges of brutality that results in a death of a citizen at the hands of the state certainly does nothing to buttress your "patriot" bonafides. And this thread doesn't describe any kind of "socialism" in WI or anyplace else. Just like the unaccountable killings of Garner and others previously mentioned, it represents Nazism, fascism, despotism and sadism. At this point, socialism would be a welcome respite from what governance and "law" enforcement in America has become.

But you keep fantasizing that there's any such thing as "lawful" in this country anymore, whodat. Keep the "faith" with criminals and thugs who brutalize and kill and violate the rights of the citizens they're sworn to "serve" on an all-too-regular basis, and then whine incessantly that I'm "purposefully" misunderstanding you. During our country's Revolution, writing down your thoughts about the law and its enforcers would have earned you the title of collaborator, certainly not "patriot" (even with a small "p").

Blues
 
“At this time, the department is withdrawing its offer under this initiative, and will be submitting the program to the city’s legal office for further review,” the release said.

Uh-oh. The SWAT team raids will commence at midnight...
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
49,544
Messages
611,260
Members
74,959
Latest member
defcon
Back
Top