| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
28 Jan 2005 04:31:24 AM |
| Object: |
Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
Why is it that a cop who kills an unarmed man is not charged with
murder like the rest of us would be? Why are cops allowed to abduct
people off the street and it's a crime to use your right to
self-defense? Why are most cops domestic batterers? Why do cops steal
so much of our money through asset forfeiture? For people who sell
themselves as "serving" and "protecting" us, they sure don't act like
it:
http://brownwatch.squarespace.com/police-brutality-archives/
http://www.fear.org/
Could it be that the cops have nothing to do with protecting average
citizens? Probably so.
------------------------------------------
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig4/peters3.html
To Serve and Protect - Itself
by John M. Peters
On November 18, 2001, a woman was shot to death in her suburban Detroit
home by her distraught husband. He then turned the gun on himself and
died instantly.
Unfortunately, this scenario is played out all too often across the
nation. If these were the only facts, you might shrug with empathy and
ask yourself why this merits your consideration. This case was
different.
In this case, the police were present - not following the
murder/suicide - but before and during it.
Following threats by her husband to her life and the lives of her
children, the woman went directly to the local police. She informed
them that she was in fear for her life and the lives of her children if
she tried to move out of the marital home. She informed the police that
her husband had a gun, had threatened her and her children that day,
and that she wanted to move out of the home. The police computer
confirmed a personal protection order had been issued by the court
against the husband.
The police agreed to accompany the woman to her home and remain there
while she removed her personal belongings and her children. Two
officers accompanied her to her home and remained inside to the end -
the end of her life and her husband's.
Despite encountering the husband, and having been apprised of all the
facts which led them to accompany the woman to her home, the police
never questioned the husband, segregated him from his wife or even
bothered to search him for a gun. They hung around and watched as the
husband followed his wife back and forth from the home to her car with
her personal belongings.
As the police spoke with others in the house, the husband followed his
wife into her bedroom, closed the door and shot her. He then shot
himself. This was exactly what the wife had asked the police to protect
her from, and what they had agreed to do.
If these police officers had been private security officers instead,
they and their employer would be held accountable in a court of law
under breach of contract or negligence theories. Alas, they are
government employees. The result is that they are not accountable for
their malfeasance or her death. This is what separates the private
sector from government.
Another government branch - the courts - has decided that police
are not legally responsible for such gross failures. In Michigan, the
state's highest court has decided that individual police officers may
not be sued unless they are the only cause of the injury or death. This
special treatment is not available to those in the private sector. In
every case involving private individuals or companies, negligence is
assessed on the basis of each party's percentage of fault. Yet
another branch of government - the Michigan legislature - passed a
statute which grants absolute immunity to any municipality, thereby
barring any claim against the officers' employer. No such privilege
is available to private sector employers.
Faced with these obstructions, the deceased woman's estate pursued a
claim against the officers' employer in federal court alleging that
she was deprived of her life without due process of law. On June 9,
2004 a federal judge dismissed the estate's case. The basis for the
dismissal was that, "a State's failure to protect an individual
against private violence simply does not constitute a violation of the
Due Process Clause." Coming from the U.S. Supreme Court, this is the
law in every state. This outrage is compounded by the government's
simultaneous efforts to prevent citizens from taking any steps to
protect themselves, and punishing them when they do.
How do you explain this state of affairs to the family of the deceased?
It was not easy. I was the attorney left with the task.
Writers such as Steven Greenhut and Paul Craig Roberts have sounded the
alarm on this growing trend of law enforcement's lack of
accountability, but the truth is that most citizens actually believe
that the police are under some legal duty to come to your aid.
In oral arguments before the federal court, I closed by noting that if
this is the state of the law in this country the courts should require
that all police vehicles be posted with a warning label which reads:
Caution: We are not required to protect you. Then, I explained, we will
at least know the truth, and be able to take steps to protect
ourselves.
The next time you read the phrase To Serve and Protect on a police
vehicle, remember that this is government's motto about itself, not
you.
June 24, 2004
John M. Peters [send him mail] is a practicing attorney in Michigan.
Copyright =A9 2004 LewRockwell.com
.
|
|
| User: "Ravage" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
30 Jan 2005 06:34:45 PM |
|
|
"You Know Who" <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com > wrote in message
news:rkdqv05j2ndv094ua3he9fcs7nuqo4big3@4ax.com...
| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:58 -0700, "Ravage"
| <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net> wrote:
|
| >
| >"You Know Who" <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com > wrote in message
| >news:3c2qv0pbc57gf08qna7upn1k0vto8ndrmp@4ax.com...
| >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:12:59 -0700, "Ravage"
| >| <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net> wrote:
| >|
| >| >"You Know Who" <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com > wrote in message
| >| >news:ldvpv0dk0bae2otc92e76el19pitvsprq0@4ax.com...
| >| >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 08:22:35 -0700, "Ravage"
| >| >| <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net> wrote:
| >| >|
| >| >| >
| >| >| >"Chas" <chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote in message
| >| >| >news:ZOqdnf7XKti6emHcRVn-ig@comcast.com...
| >| >|
| >| >| >| Rights don't change- only permissions under strong-man rule.
| >| >| >
| >| >| >Rights do change. Step over the border into Mexico and you'll see
how
| >| >| >quickly.
| >| >|
| >| >| You just helped to illustrate his point.
| >| >
| >| >What makes you think I disagreed with him?
| >|
| >| What makes you think I thought you did?
| >
| >What makes you think I thought you think I thought you did?
| >
|
| Are you somehow under the impression that I think you thought I was
| thinking that you did?
No, but it was apparent that you thought my impression of your thought was
that I was thinking you thought I thought he did.
But I didn't!
.
|
|
|
| User: "You Know Who " |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
30 Jan 2005 07:48:38 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 17:34:45 -0700, "Ravage"
<ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net> wrote:
"You Know Who" <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com > wrote in message
news:rkdqv05j2ndv094ua3he9fcs7nuqo4big3@4ax.com...
| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:58 -0700, "Ravage"
| <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net> wrote:
|
| >
| >"You Know Who" <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com > wrote in message
| >news:3c2qv0pbc57gf08qna7upn1k0vto8ndrmp@4ax.com...
| >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:12:59 -0700, "Ravage"
| >| <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net> wrote:
| >|
| >| >"You Know Who" <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com > wrote in message
| >| >news:ldvpv0dk0bae2otc92e76el19pitvsprq0@4ax.com...
| >| >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 08:22:35 -0700, "Ravage"
| >| >| <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net> wrote:
| >| >|
| >| >| >
| >| >| >"Chas" <chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote in message
| >| >| >news:ZOqdnf7XKti6emHcRVn-ig@comcast.com...
| >| >|
| >| >| >| Rights don't change- only permissions under strong-man rule.
| >| >| >
| >| >| >Rights do change. Step over the border into Mexico and you'll see
how
| >| >| >quickly.
| >| >|
| >| >| You just helped to illustrate his point.
| >| >
| >| >What makes you think I disagreed with him?
| >|
| >| What makes you think I thought you did?
| >
| >What makes you think I thought you think I thought you did?
| >
|
| Are you somehow under the impression that I think you thought I was
| thinking that you did?
No, but it was apparent that you thought my impression of your thought was
that I was thinking you thought I thought he did.
But I didn't!
At first glance, I could see how it is possible that you could mistake
my impression as that of someone who thought your thought was that you
were thinking (or was it I?) that you (or I, as the case my be)
thought you (or I) thought he did.
But since I can no longer even remember who "he" is, I would suggest
that we consider the case culminated, and begin drinking heavily. What
say you to this idea?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ravage" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
30 Jan 2005 08:34:05 PM |
|
|
"You Know Who" <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com > wrote in message
news:0c3rv09ls3d1472csfel960bfo28drft59@4ax.com...
| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 17:34:45 -0700, "Ravage"
| <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net> wrote:
|
| >"You Know Who" <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com > wrote in message
| >news:rkdqv05j2ndv094ua3he9fcs7nuqo4big3@4ax.com...
| >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:58 -0700, "Ravage"
| >| <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net> wrote:
| >|
| >| >
| >| >"You Know Who" <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com > wrote in message
| >| >news:3c2qv0pbc57gf08qna7upn1k0vto8ndrmp@4ax.com...
| >| >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:12:59 -0700, "Ravage"
| >| >| <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net> wrote:
| >| >|
| >| >| >"You Know Who" <vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com > wrote in message
| >| >| >news:ldvpv0dk0bae2otc92e76el19pitvsprq0@4ax.com...
| >| >| >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 08:22:35 -0700, "Ravage"
| >| >| >| <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net> wrote:
| >| >| >|
| >| >| >| >
| >| >| >| >"Chas" <chasclementsSPOOF@comcast.net> wrote in message
| >| >| >| >news:ZOqdnf7XKti6emHcRVn-ig@comcast.com...
| >| >| >|
| >| >| >| >| Rights don't change- only permissions under strong-man rule.
| >| >| >| >
| >| >| >| >Rights do change. Step over the border into Mexico and you'll
see
| >how
| >| >| >| >quickly.
| >| >| >|
| >| >| >| You just helped to illustrate his point.
| >| >| >
| >| >| >What makes you think I disagreed with him?
| >| >|
| >| >| What makes you think I thought you did?
| >| >
| >| >What makes you think I thought you think I thought you did?
| >| >
| >|
| >| Are you somehow under the impression that I think you thought I was
| >| thinking that you did?
| >
| >No, but it was apparent that you thought my impression of your thought
was
| >that I was thinking you thought I thought he did.
| >
| >But I didn't!
| >
|
| At first glance, I could see how it is possible that you could mistake
| my impression as that of someone who thought your thought was that you
| were thinking (or was it I?) that you (or I, as the case my be)
| thought you (or I) thought he did.
|
| But since I can no longer even remember who "he" is, I would suggest
| that we consider the case culminated, and begin drinking heavily. What
| say you to this idea?
I second the motion!
See you at the pub!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Z. Helm" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
31 Jan 2005 09:13:26 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 19:34:05 -0700, "Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| But since I can no longer even remember who "he" is, I would suggest
| that we consider the case culminated, and begin drinking heavily. What
| say you to this idea?
I second the motion!
Great. We can hang you both at dawn for abusing drugs.
See you at the pub!
.
|
|
|
| User: "You Know Who " |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
31 Jan 2005 10:09:08 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:13:26 -0700, Mike Z. Helm <mhelm@not.known>
wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 19:34:05 -0700, "Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| But since I can no longer even remember who "he" is, I would suggest
| that we consider the case culminated, and begin drinking heavily. What
| say you to this idea?
I second the motion!
Great. We can hang you both at dawn for abusing drugs.
See you at the pub!
Give it your best shot, chump.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Z. Helm" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
01 Feb 2005 12:57:24 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:09:08 -0800, You Know Who
<vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com >
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:13:26 -0700, Mike Z. Helm <mhelm@not.known>
wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 19:34:05 -0700, "Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| But since I can no longer even remember who "he" is, I would suggest
| that we consider the case culminated, and begin drinking heavily. What
| say you to this idea?
I second the motion!
Great. We can hang you both at dawn for abusing drugs.
See you at the pub!
Give it your best shot, chump.
You're drinking buddy will do it for you. He's the one who called for
executions.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
01 Feb 2005 06:33:51 PM |
|
|
"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
news:48kvv0li5cdjpqvv21pcgo5qoe1a9lr5s7@4ax.com...
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:09:08 -0800, You Know Who
<vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com >
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:13:26 -0700, Mike Z. Helm <mhelm@not.known>
wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 19:34:05 -0700, "Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| But since I can no longer even remember who "he" is, I would suggest
| that we consider the case culminated, and begin drinking heavily. What
| say you to this idea?
I second the motion!
Great. We can hang you both at dawn for abusing drugs.
See you at the pub!
Give it your best shot, chump.
You're drinking buddy will do it for you. He's the one who called for
executions.
Is that before or after his castration?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "You Know Who " |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
01 Feb 2005 01:00:34 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 11:57:24 -0700, Mike Z. Helm <mhelm@not.known>
wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:09:08 -0800, You Know Who
<vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com >
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:13:26 -0700, Mike Z. Helm <mhelm@not.known>
wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 19:34:05 -0700, "Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| But since I can no longer even remember who "he" is, I would suggest
| that we consider the case culminated, and begin drinking heavily. What
| say you to this idea?
I second the motion!
Great. We can hang you both at dawn for abusing drugs.
See you at the pub!
Give it your best shot, chump.
You're drinking buddy will do it for you. He's the one who called for
executions.
:From: Mike Z. Helm <mhelm@not.known>
:Message-ID: <etstv0pq9dhotge2fti93lan43h2d3lsqj@4ax.com>
:
:Great. We can hang you both at dawn for abusing drugs.
So you were just joking, then. I thought so.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Z. Helm" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
01 Feb 2005 06:30:26 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 11:00:34 -0800, You Know Who
<vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com >
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 11:57:24 -0700, Mike Z. Helm <mhelm@not.known>
wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:09:08 -0800, You Know Who
<vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com >
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:13:26 -0700, Mike Z. Helm <mhelm@not.known>
wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 19:34:05 -0700, "Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| But since I can no longer even remember who "he" is, I would suggest
| that we consider the case culminated, and begin drinking heavily. What
| say you to this idea?
I second the motion!
Great. We can hang you both at dawn for abusing drugs.
See you at the pub!
Give it your best shot, chump.
You're drinking buddy will do it for you. He's the one who called for
executions.
:From: Mike Z. Helm <mhelm@not.known>
:Message-ID: <etstv0pq9dhotge2fti93lan43h2d3lsqj@4ax.com>
:
:Great. We can hang you both at dawn for abusing drugs.
So you were just joking, then. I thought so.
Better ask your drinking buddy if he was just joking.
.
|
|
|
| User: "You Know Who " |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
01 Feb 2005 09:58:26 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 17:30:26 -0700, Mike Z. Helm <mhelm@not.known>
wrote:
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 11:00:34 -0800, You Know Who
<vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com >
On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 11:57:24 -0700, Mike Z. Helm <mhelm@not.known>
wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:09:08 -0800, You Know Who
<vous_savez_qui@i-hate-france.com >
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 20:13:26 -0700, Mike Z. Helm <mhelm@not.known>
wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 19:34:05 -0700, "Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| But since I can no longer even remember who "he" is, I would suggest
| that we consider the case culminated, and begin drinking heavily. What
| say you to this idea?
I second the motion!
Great. We can hang you both at dawn for abusing drugs.
See you at the pub!
Give it your best shot, chump.
You're drinking buddy will do it for you. He's the one who called for
executions.
:From: Mike Z. Helm <mhelm@not.known>
:Message-ID: <etstv0pq9dhotge2fti93lan43h2d3lsqj@4ax.com>
:
:Great. We can hang you both at dawn for abusing drugs.
So you were just joking, then. I thought so.
Better ask your drinking buddy if he was just joking.
You were the one that brought it up. He and I are just have a friendly
beer.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Z. Helm" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
31 Jan 2005 07:41:10 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:58 -0700, "Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| >| You just helped to illustrate his point.
| >
| >What makes you think I disagreed with him?
|
| What makes you think I thought you did?
What makes you think I thought you think I thought you did?
If this is what you're like when you're (presumably) not on drugs, no
wonder you're so afraid of them.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ravage" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
01 Feb 2005 06:19:49 AM |
|
|
"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
news:tgntv0p38rarjt468dld3fqclj511g2atq@4ax.com...
| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:58 -0700, "Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
|
| >| >| You just helped to illustrate his point.
| >| >
| >| >What makes you think I disagreed with him?
| >|
| >| What makes you think I thought you did?
| >
| >What makes you think I thought you think I thought you did?
|
| If this is what you're like when you're (presumably) not on drugs, no
| wonder you're so afraid of them.
I'm not afraid of drugs, Mike. I'm afraid of all you idiots out there who
have deluded yourselves into thinking you can control your behavior when
you're on them.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Z. Helm" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
01 Feb 2005 12:56:55 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 05:19:49 -0700, "Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
news:tgntv0p38rarjt468dld3fqclj511g2atq@4ax.com...
| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:58 -0700, "Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
|
| >| >| You just helped to illustrate his point.
| >| >
| >| >What makes you think I disagreed with him?
| >|
| >| What makes you think I thought you did?
| >
| >What makes you think I thought you think I thought you did?
|
| If this is what you're like when you're (presumably) not on drugs, no
| wonder you're so afraid of them.
I'm not afraid of drugs, Mike. I'm afraid of all you idiots out there who
have deluded yourselves into thinking you can control your behavior when
you're on them.
Oh? Are you saying I can't control my behavior?
How is it I've managed to do so for as long as I have?
Just because you're a bumbling idiot, doesn't mean anyone else is.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ravage" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
04 Feb 2005 06:31:36 AM |
|
|
"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
news:d6kvv09ne2hu6rg105f60ormeuc6hlnk0n@4ax.com...
| On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 05:19:49 -0700, "Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
|
| >"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| >news:tgntv0p38rarjt468dld3fqclj511g2atq@4ax.com...
| >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:58 -0700, "Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| >|
| >| >| >| You just helped to illustrate his point.
| >| >| >
| >| >| >What makes you think I disagreed with him?
| >| >|
| >| >| What makes you think I thought you did?
| >| >
| >| >What makes you think I thought you think I thought you did?
| >|
| >| If this is what you're like when you're (presumably) not on drugs, no
| >| wonder you're so afraid of them.
| >
| >I'm not afraid of drugs, Mike. I'm afraid of all you idiots out there
who
| >have deluded yourselves into thinking you can control your behavior when
| >you're on them.
| >
|
| Oh? Are you saying I can't control my behavior?
If you are using illegal recreational drugs - putting your entire lifestyle
at risk - not to mention your wife, children, and extended family who will
have to come visit daddy in prison for the next 5 years if he gets caught -
you bet thats what I'm saying.
|
| How is it I've managed to do so for as long as I have?
If you're usig illegal drugs, then its because you haven't gotten caught
yet. Besides, how do we know you're controlling it? Because someone who
assumes the moniker "Mike Helm" - DOB unknown, place of residence unknown
says he's controlling it?
|
| Just because you're a bumbling idiot, doesn't mean anyone else is.
I don't know what your definition of a bumbling idiot is, Mike - but mine
would include a person who takes unnecessary risks for little or no gain. I
hope that doesn't describew your behavior.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
04 Feb 2005 05:11:28 PM |
|
|
"Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net> wrote in message
news:PUJMd.799$yr.96@okepread05...
"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
news:d6kvv09ne2hu6rg105f60ormeuc6hlnk0n@4ax.com...
| On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 05:19:49 -0700, "Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
|
| >"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| >news:tgntv0p38rarjt468dld3fqclj511g2atq@4ax.com...
| >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:58 -0700, "Ravage"
<ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| >|
| >| >| >| You just helped to illustrate his point.
| >| >| >
| >| >| >What makes you think I disagreed with him?
| >| >|
| >| >| What makes you think I thought you did?
| >| >
| >| >What makes you think I thought you think I thought you did?
| >|
| >| If this is what you're like when you're (presumably) not on drugs, no
| >| wonder you're so afraid of them.
| >
| >I'm not afraid of drugs, Mike. I'm afraid of all you idiots out there
who
| >have deluded yourselves into thinking you can control your behavior
when
| >you're on them.
| >
|
| Oh? Are you saying I can't control my behavior?
If you are using illegal recreational drugs - putting your entire
lifestyle
at risk - not to mention your wife, children, and extended family who will
have to come visit daddy in prison for the next 5 years if he gets
caught -
you bet thats what I'm saying.
Ah, so the danger in these drugs isn't the drugs.....it's the
Unconstitutional penalties that have been imposed.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Olaf Gustafson" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
04 Feb 2005 10:58:17 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 05:31:36 -0700, "Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
wrote:
| Oh? Are you saying I can't control my behavior?
If you are using illegal recreational drugs - putting your entire lifestyle
at risk - not to mention your wife, children, and extended family who will
have to come visit daddy in prison for the next 5 years if he gets caught -
you bet thats what I'm saying.
So you think someone is going to go to prison for 5 years for smoking
a little grass?
|
| How is it I've managed to do so for as long as I have?
If you're usig illegal drugs, then its because you haven't gotten caught
yet.
And more than likely will never be caught.
Besides, how do we know you're controlling it? Because someone who
assumes the moniker "Mike Helm" - DOB unknown, place of residence unknown
says he's controlling it?
|
| Just because you're a bumbling idiot, doesn't mean anyone else is.
I don't know what your definition of a bumbling idiot is, Mike - but mine
would include a person who takes unnecessary risks for little or no gain. I
hope that doesn't describew your behavior.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ravage" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
05 Feb 2005 02:46:10 AM |
|
|
I thought I was discussing this with one individual, but what the hell...
"Olaf Gustafson" <none@dev.null> wrote in message
news:gba701lm39qfvjlmlouassejupq6ek41sh@4ax.com...
| On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 05:31:36 -0700, "Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| wrote:
|
| >| Oh? Are you saying I can't control my behavior?
| >
| >If you are using illegal recreational drugs - putting your entire
lifestyle
| >at risk - not to mention your wife, children, and extended family who
will
| >have to come visit daddy in prison for the next 5 years if he gets
caught -
| >you bet thats what I'm saying.
| >
|
| So you think someone is going to go to prison for 5 years for smoking
| a little grass?
Is that what I said? Or is that what you're saying?
|
| >|
| >| How is it I've managed to do so for as long as I have?
| >
| >If you're usig illegal drugs, then its because you haven't gotten caught
| >yet.
|
|
| And more than likely will never be caught.
Lots of people worldwide currently doing time for it would disagree...
|
| >Besides, how do we know you're controlling it? Because someone who
| >assumes the moniker "Mike Helm" - DOB unknown, place of residence unknown
| >says he's controlling it?
| >
| >|
| >| Just because you're a bumbling idiot, doesn't mean anyone else is.
| >
| >I don't know what your definition of a bumbling idiot is, Mike - but mine
| >would include a person who takes unnecessary risks for little or no gain.
I
| >hope that doesn't describew your behavior.
| >
|
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
04 Feb 2005 04:26:06 PM |
|
|
Olaf Gustafson wrote:
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 05:31:36 -0700, "Ravage"
<ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
wrote:
| Oh? Are you saying I can't control my behavior?
If you are using illegal recreational drugs - putting your entire
lifestyle
at risk - not to mention your wife, children, and extended family
who will
have to come visit daddy in prison for the next 5 years if he gets
caught -
you bet thats what I'm saying.
So you think someone is going to go to prison for 5 years for smoking
a little grass?
Only if they're black.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
04 Feb 2005 04:14:25 PM |
|
|
Ravage wrote:
"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
news:d6kvv09ne2hu6rg105f60ormeuc6hlnk0n@4ax.com...
| On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 05:19:49 -0700, "Ravage"
<ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
|
| >"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| >news:tgntv0p38rarjt468dld3fqclj511g2atq@4ax.com...
| >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:58 -0700, "Ravage"
<ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| >|
| >| >| >| You just helped to illustrate his point.
| >| >| >
| >| >| >What makes you think I disagreed with him?
| >| >|
| >| >| What makes you think I thought you did?
| >| >
| >| >What makes you think I thought you think I thought you did?
| >|
| >| If this is what you're like when you're (presumably) not on
drugs, no
| >| wonder you're so afraid of them.
| >
| >I'm not afraid of drugs, Mike. I'm afraid of all you idiots out
there
who
| >have deluded yourselves into thinking you can control your
behavior when
| >you're on them.
| >
|
| Oh? Are you saying I can't control my behavior?
If you are using illegal recreational drugs - putting your entire
lifestyle
at risk - not to mention your wife, children, and extended family who
will
have to come visit daddy in prison for the next 5 years if he gets
caught -
you bet thats what I'm saying.
But alcohol is OK?
|
| How is it I've managed to do so for as long as I have?
If you're usig illegal drugs, then its because you haven't gotten
caught
yet. Besides, how do we know you're controlling it? Because someone
who
assumes the moniker "Mike Helm" - DOB unknown, place of residence
unknown
says he's controlling it?
What does it matter to you outside of the fact that the "drug war"
(which you're losing, BTW) keeps you employed at the detriment to
society at large?
|
| Just because you're a bumbling idiot, doesn't mean anyone else is.
I don't know what your definition of a bumbling idiot is
I'd say you're the perfect example of it. In anyone's book.
Too bad you're too much of a chickenshit that you have to killfile
anyone you can't best in rational argument. Par for the course for a
cop, most of whom are cowards of the worst kind.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ravage" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
05 Feb 2005 02:52:12 AM |
|
|
<buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
news:1107555265.273548.116310@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
|
| Ravage wrote:
| > "Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| > news:d6kvv09ne2hu6rg105f60ormeuc6hlnk0n@4ax.com...
| > | On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 05:19:49 -0700, "Ravage"
| <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| > |
| > | >"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| > | >news:tgntv0p38rarjt468dld3fqclj511g2atq@4ax.com...
| > | >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:58 -0700, "Ravage"
| <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| > | >|
| > | >| >| >| You just helped to illustrate his point.
| > | >| >| >
| > | >| >| >What makes you think I disagreed with him?
| > | >| >|
| > | >| >| What makes you think I thought you did?
| > | >| >
| > | >| >What makes you think I thought you think I thought you did?
| > | >|
| > | >| If this is what you're like when you're (presumably) not on
| drugs, no
| > | >| wonder you're so afraid of them.
| > | >
| > | >I'm not afraid of drugs, Mike. I'm afraid of all you idiots out
| there
| > who
| > | >have deluded yourselves into thinking you can control your
| behavior when
| > | >you're on them.
| > | >
| > |
| > | Oh? Are you saying I can't control my behavior?
| >
| > If you are using illegal recreational drugs - putting your entire
| lifestyle
| > at risk - not to mention your wife, children, and extended family who
| will
| > have to come visit daddy in prison for the next 5 years if he gets
| caught -
| > you bet thats what I'm saying.
| >
|
| But alcohol is OK?
Alcohol is legal - within certain boundaries. Understand the difference?
|
| > |
| > | How is it I've managed to do so for as long as I have?
| >
| > If you're usig illegal drugs, then its because you haven't gotten
| caught
| > yet. Besides, how do we know you're controlling it? Because someone
| who
| > assumes the moniker "Mike Helm" - DOB unknown, place of residence
| unknown
| > says he's controlling it?
| >
|
| What does it matter to you outside of the fact that the "drug war"
| (which you're losing, BTW) keeps you employed at the detriment to
| society at large?
So you think if drugs were all legalized, everyone in law enforcement would
be out a job?
|
| > |
| > | Just because you're a bumbling idiot, doesn't mean anyone else is.
| >
| > I don't know what your definition of a bumbling idiot is
|
| I'd say you're the perfect example of it. In anyone's book.
| Too bad you're too much of a chickenshit that you have to killfile
| anyone you can't best in rational argument. Par for the course for a
| cop, most of whom are cowards of the worst kind.
I'm not a cop, "Bittpirate", but let me ask you a question -
You think this childish comment of yours constitutes an "argument"?
You really believe people that operate at your mental capacity deserve to be
responded to?
I don't often answer you for one reason, "Buttpirate" - because doing so
would be like getting into a "My dad's bigger than your dad" argument with a
five year old.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
05 Feb 2005 03:53:43 AM |
|
|
"Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net> wrote in message
news:7N%Md.862$yr.511@okepread05...
<buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
news:1107555265.273548.116310@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
|
| Ravage wrote:
| > "Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| > news:d6kvv09ne2hu6rg105f60ormeuc6hlnk0n@4ax.com...
| > | On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 05:19:49 -0700, "Ravage"
| <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| > |
| > | >"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| > | >news:tgntv0p38rarjt468dld3fqclj511g2atq@4ax.com...
| > | >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:58 -0700, "Ravage"
| <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| > | >|
| > | >| >| >| You just helped to illustrate his point.
| > | >| >| >
| > | >| >| >What makes you think I disagreed with him?
| > | >| >|
| > | >| >| What makes you think I thought you did?
| > | >| >
| > | >| >What makes you think I thought you think I thought you did?
| > | >|
| > | >| If this is what you're like when you're (presumably) not on
| drugs, no
| > | >| wonder you're so afraid of them.
| > | >
| > | >I'm not afraid of drugs, Mike. I'm afraid of all you idiots out
| there
| > who
| > | >have deluded yourselves into thinking you can control your
| behavior when
| > | >you're on them.
| > | >
| > |
| > | Oh? Are you saying I can't control my behavior?
| >
| > If you are using illegal recreational drugs - putting your entire
| lifestyle
| > at risk - not to mention your wife, children, and extended family who
| will
| > have to come visit daddy in prison for the next 5 years if he gets
| caught -
| > you bet thats what I'm saying.
| >
|
| But alcohol is OK?
Alcohol is legal - within certain boundaries. Understand the difference?
Yes, it's all a matter of legality....not drugs.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rump Ranger" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
05 Feb 2005 05:35:14 AM |
|
|
Ravage wrote:
<buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
news:1107555265.273548.116310@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
|
| Ravage wrote:
| > "Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| > news:d6kvv09ne2hu6rg105f60ormeuc6hlnk0n@4ax.com...
| > | On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 05:19:49 -0700, "Ravage"
| <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| > |
| > | >"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| > | >news:tgntv0p38rarjt468dld3fqclj511g2atq@4ax.com...
| > | >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:58 -0700, "Ravage"
| <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| > | >|
| > | >| >| >| You just helped to illustrate his point.
| > | >| >| >
| > | >| >| >What makes you think I disagreed with him?
| > | >| >|
| > | >| >| What makes you think I thought you did?
| > | >| >
| > | >| >What makes you think I thought you think I thought you did?
| > | >|
| > | >| If this is what you're like when you're (presumably) not on
| drugs, no
| > | >| wonder you're so afraid of them.
| > | >
| > | >I'm not afraid of drugs, Mike. I'm afraid of all you idiots
out
| there
| > who
| > | >have deluded yourselves into thinking you can control your
| behavior when
| > | >you're on them.
| > | >
| > |
| > | Oh? Are you saying I can't control my behavior?
| >
| > If you are using illegal recreational drugs - putting your entire
| lifestyle
| > at risk - not to mention your wife, children, and extended family
who
| will
| > have to come visit daddy in prison for the next 5 years if he
gets
| caught -
| > you bet thats what I'm saying.
| >
|
| But alcohol is OK?
Alcohol is legal - within certain boundaries. Understand the
difference?
Don't see why it is because it's just as much a mind altering drug as
cocaine is. Why is alcohol legal whereas other drugs aren't?
|
| > |
| > | How is it I've managed to do so for as long as I have?
| >
| > If you're usig illegal drugs, then its because you haven't gotten
| caught
| > yet. Besides, how do we know you're controlling it? Because
someone
| who
| > assumes the moniker "Mike Helm" - DOB unknown, place of residence
| unknown
| > says he's controlling it?
| >
|
| What does it matter to you outside of the fact that the "drug war"
| (which you're losing, BTW) keeps you employed at the detriment to
| society at large?
So you think if drugs were all legalized, everyone in law enforcement
would
be out a job?
A significant portion of them would be. Which would be a good thing,
BTW.
|
| > |
| > | Just because you're a bumbling idiot, doesn't mean anyone else
is.
| >
| > I don't know what your definition of a bumbling idiot is
|
| I'd say you're the perfect example of it. In anyone's book.
| Too bad you're too much of a chickenshit that you have to killfile
| anyone you can't best in rational argument. Par for the course for
a
| cop, most of whom are cowards of the worst kind.
I'm not a cop, "Bittpirate",
But I'm sure you wish you were, don't you "Ravage"?
but let me ask you a question -
You think this childish comment of yours constitutes an "argument"?
You really believe people that operate at your mental capacity
deserve to be
responded to?
Why do you do it then?
I don't often answer you for one reason, "Buttpirate" - because doing
so
would be like getting into a "My dad's bigger than your dad" argument
with a
five year old.
That's your explanation, but of course you and me both know that isn't
the reason why you do it, "Ravage." You do it because you can't answer
the argument. Now run away with your tail tucked between your legs.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ravage" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
05 Feb 2005 12:05:30 PM |
|
|
"Rump Ranger" <buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
news:1107603314.965042.282490@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
|
| Ravage wrote:
| > <buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
| > news:1107555265.273548.116310@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
| > |
| > | Ravage wrote:
| > | > "Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| > | > news:d6kvv09ne2hu6rg105f60ormeuc6hlnk0n@4ax.com...
| > | > | On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 05:19:49 -0700, "Ravage"
| > | <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| > | > |
| > | > | >"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| > | > | >news:tgntv0p38rarjt468dld3fqclj511g2atq@4ax.com...
| > | > | >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:58 -0700, "Ravage"
| > | <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| > | > | >|
| > | > | >| >| >| You just helped to illustrate his point.
| > | > | >| >| >
| > | > | >| >| >What makes you think I disagreed with him?
| > | > | >| >|
| > | > | >| >| What makes you think I thought you did?
| > | > | >| >
| > | > | >| >What makes you think I thought you think I thought you did?
| > | > | >|
| > | > | >| If this is what you're like when you're (presumably) not on
| > | drugs, no
| > | > | >| wonder you're so afraid of them.
| > | > | >
| > | > | >I'm not afraid of drugs, Mike. I'm afraid of all you idiots
| out
| > | there
| > | > who
| > | > | >have deluded yourselves into thinking you can control your
| > | behavior when
| > | > | >you're on them.
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | > | Oh? Are you saying I can't control my behavior?
| > | >
| > | > If you are using illegal recreational drugs - putting your entire
| > | lifestyle
| > | > at risk - not to mention your wife, children, and extended family
| who
| > | will
| > | > have to come visit daddy in prison for the next 5 years if he
| gets
| > | caught -
| > | > you bet thats what I'm saying.
| > | >
| > |
| > | But alcohol is OK?
| >
| > Alcohol is legal - within certain boundaries. Understand the
| difference?
| >
|
| Don't see why it is because it's just as much a mind altering drug as
| cocaine is. Why is alcohol legal whereas other drugs aren't?
Excellent point - and a completely seperate argument. I'd love to exchange
ideas on this with you in a brand new thread. Start it if you like. My
short answer goes something like this: It has to do with taxes and revenue
for the Federal Government as well as the lobbying power of the Alcohol
Industry. Think about it. If you made whiskey, would you want pot and coke
legal?
|
| > |
| > | > |
| > | > | How is it I've managed to do so for as long as I have?
| > | >
| > | > If you're usig illegal drugs, then its because you haven't gotten
| > | caught
| > | > yet. Besides, how do we know you're controlling it? Because
| someone
| > | who
| > | > assumes the moniker "Mike Helm" - DOB unknown, place of residence
| > | unknown
| > | > says he's controlling it?
| > | >
| > |
| > | What does it matter to you outside of the fact that the "drug war"
| > | (which you're losing, BTW) keeps you employed at the detriment to
| > | society at large?
| >
| > So you think if drugs were all legalized, everyone in law enforcement
| would
| > be out a job?
| >
|
| A significant portion of them would be. Which would be a good thing,
| BTW.
Maybe. Maybe not. I'd rather have them looking for murderers and rapists
myself.
|
| > |
| > | > |
| > | > | Just because you're a bumbling idiot, doesn't mean anyone else
| is.
| > | >
| > | > I don't know what your definition of a bumbling idiot is
| > |
| > | I'd say you're the perfect example of it. In anyone's book.
| > | Too bad you're too much of a chickenshit that you have to killfile
| > | anyone you can't best in rational argument. Par for the course for
| a
| > | cop, most of whom are cowards of the worst kind.
| >
| > I'm not a cop, "Bittpirate",
|
| But I'm sure you wish you were, don't you "Ravage"?
Not really. I don't have the personality or temperment for it. I think
people do and say things to police officers that they wouldn't think of
saying or doing to Joe Blow out on the street because they know a police
officer is extremely limited in how he is permitted to respond. You talk to
me like that and I might be just as likely to shoot your stupid ***** - or at
the very least knock the cat ***** out of you and walk away without
repurcussion. If I was a police officer, I couldn't get away with that.
|
| > but let me ask you a question -
| > You think this childish comment of yours constitutes an "argument"?
| > You really believe people that operate at your mental capacity
| deserve to be
| > responded to?
| >
|
| Why do you do it then?
I'm hoping people can get back on track with the discussion instead of
trailing off on these silly personal attack side bars. This is a discussion
about the legality of recreational drug use. It isn't about you or me
personally.
|
| > I don't often answer you for one reason, "Buttpirate" - because doing
| so
| > would be like getting into a "My dad's bigger than your dad" argument
| with a
| > five year old.
|
| That's your explanation, but of course you and me both know that isn't
| the reason why you do it, "Ravage." You do it because you can't answer
| the argument. Now run away with your tail tucked between your legs.
You haven't made an argument, Buttpirate. You've launched into childish
personal attacks. The two aren't the same.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rump Ranger" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
05 Feb 2005 12:31:59 PM |
|
|
Ravage wrote:
"Rump Ranger" <buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
news:1107603314.965042.282490@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
|
| Ravage wrote:
| > <buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
| > news:1107555265.273548.116310@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
| > |
| > | Ravage wrote:
| > | > "Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| > | > news:d6kvv09ne2hu6rg105f60ormeuc6hlnk0n@4ax.com...
| > | > | On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 05:19:49 -0700, "Ravage"
| > | <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| > | > |
| > | > | >"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| > | > | >news:tgntv0p38rarjt468dld3fqclj511g2atq@4ax.com...
| > | > | >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:58 -0700, "Ravage"
| > | <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| > | > | >|
| > | > | >| >| >| You just helped to illustrate his point.
| > | > | >| >| >
| > | > | >| >| >What makes you think I disagreed with him?
| > | > | >| >|
| > | > | >| >| What makes you think I thought you did?
| > | > | >| >
| > | > | >| >What makes you think I thought you think I thought you
did?
| > | > | >|
| > | > | >| If this is what you're like when you're (presumably) not
on
| > | drugs, no
| > | > | >| wonder you're so afraid of them.
| > | > | >
| > | > | >I'm not afraid of drugs, Mike. I'm afraid of all you
idiots
| out
| > | there
| > | > who
| > | > | >have deluded yourselves into thinking you can control your
| > | behavior when
| > | > | >you're on them.
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | > | Oh? Are you saying I can't control my behavior?
| > | >
| > | > If you are using illegal recreational drugs - putting your
entire
| > | lifestyle
| > | > at risk - not to mention your wife, children, and extended
family
| who
| > | will
| > | > have to come visit daddy in prison for the next 5 years if he
| gets
| > | caught -
| > | > you bet thats what I'm saying.
| > | >
| > |
| > | But alcohol is OK?
| >
| > Alcohol is legal - within certain boundaries. Understand the
| difference?
| >
|
| Don't see why it is because it's just as much a mind altering drug
as
| cocaine is. Why is alcohol legal whereas other drugs aren't?
Excellent point - and a completely seperate argument. I'd love to
exchange
ideas on this with you in a brand new thread. Start it if you like.
My
short answer goes something like this: It has to do with taxes and
revenue
for the Federal Government as well as the lobbying power of the
Alcohol
Industry. Think about it. If you made whiskey, would you want pot
and coke
legal?
IOW, the drugs laws make *no sense* whatsoever. So why do you argue
that they're right?
|
| > |
| > | > |
| > | > | How is it I've managed to do so for as long as I have?
| > | >
| > | > If you're usig illegal drugs, then its because you haven't
gotten
| > | caught
| > | > yet. Besides, how do we know you're controlling it? Because
| someone
| > | who
| > | > assumes the moniker "Mike Helm" - DOB unknown, place of
residence
| > | unknown
| > | > says he's controlling it?
| > | >
| > |
| > | What does it matter to you outside of the fact that the "drug
war"
| > | (which you're losing, BTW) keeps you employed at the detriment
to
| > | society at large?
| >
| > So you think if drugs were all legalized, everyone in law
enforcement
| would
| > be out a job?
| >
|
| A significant portion of them would be. Which would be a good
thing,
| BTW.
Maybe. Maybe not. I'd rather have them looking for murderers and
rapists
myself.
Then let's get rid of the truly *wasteful* and *pointless* war on
drugs. Even looking for murderers and rapists (always after the act
because it's pretty much impossible for them to stop it) they're not
that good.
|
| > |
| > | > |
| > | > | Just because you're a bumbling idiot, doesn't mean anyone
else
| is.
| > | >
| > | > I don't know what your definition of a bumbling idiot is
| > |
| > | I'd say you're the perfect example of it. In anyone's book.
| > | Too bad you're too much of a chickenshit that you have to
killfile
| > | anyone you can't best in rational argument. Par for the course
for
| a
| > | cop, most of whom are cowards of the worst kind.
| >
| > I'm not a cop, "Bittpirate",
|
| But I'm sure you wish you were, don't you "Ravage"?
Not really. I don't have the personality or temperment for it. I
think
people do and say things to police officers that they wouldn't think
of
saying or doing to Joe Blow out on the street because they know a
police
officer is extremely limited in how he is permitted to respond.
Never dealt with a police officer, have you? People say things to
police officers they wouldn't say to others because police officers
*do* things to them nobody else would. Namely abusing, harrassing,
terrorizing, and infringing upon the civil rights of the general
public. They get less abuse than they deserve and furthermore have the
means to take revenge on those who don't pay them their "due respect"
to stroke their fragile egos. And then they're in charge of
investigating their own abuses! Nobody else in civilian society gets
that kind of latitude. Nobody.
You talk to
me like that and I might be just as likely to shoot your stupid *****
Riiiiiight. In a Libertarian society, those who shoot for simple
insults would die fast. Nobody with a hothead would last for long.
- or at
the very least knock the cat ***** out of you and walk away without
repurcussion. If I was a police officer, I couldn't get away with
that.
Sure you couldn't. They get away with it all the time. Even the cases
which are brought to light represent a small fraction of the abuse they
bring upon common citizens. What most people would go to prison for
life for they get to do every day with sanction. Because it's their
job.
|
| > but let me ask you a question -
| > You think this childish comment of yours constitutes an
"argument"?
| > You really believe people that operate at your mental capacity
| deserve to be
| > responded to?
| >
|
| Why do you do it then?
I'm hoping people can get back on track with the discussion instead
of
trailing off on these silly personal attack side bars. This is a
discussion
about the legality of recreational drug use. It isn't about you or
me
personally.
Nonsense. You're not here for serious discussion about the legality of
drug laws. You're an apologist for State oppression and attack anyone
who doesn't bow down to it as "children."
|
| > I don't often answer you for one reason, "Buttpirate" - because
doing
| so
| > would be like getting into a "My dad's bigger than your dad"
argument
| with a
| > five year old.
|
| That's your explanation, but of course you and me both know that
isn't
| the reason why you do it, "Ravage." You do it because you can't
answer
| the argument. Now run away with your tail tucked between your
legs.
You haven't made an argument, Buttpirate. You've launched into
childish
personal attacks.
Of which a moron like you deserves. You're a retard and have proven it
quite clearly in this thread. By extension, anyone who treats you as
anything other than a retard is acting in a retarded manner. There's
no point in treating you seriously if you're going to handwave all
others as "pointless" or "children."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ravage" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
05 Feb 2005 12:57:34 PM |
|
|
"Rump Ranger" <buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
news:1107628319.119845.15930@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
|
| Ravage wrote:
| > "Rump Ranger" <buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
| > news:1107603314.965042.282490@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
| > |
| > | Ravage wrote:
| > | > <buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
| > | > news:1107555265.273548.116310@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
| > | > |
| > | > | Ravage wrote:
| > | > | > "Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| > | > | > news:d6kvv09ne2hu6rg105f60ormeuc6hlnk0n@4ax.com...
| > | > | > | On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 05:19:49 -0700, "Ravage"
| > | > | <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | >"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| > | > | > | >news:tgntv0p38rarjt468dld3fqclj511g2atq@4ax.com...
| > | > | > | >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:58 -0700, "Ravage"
| > | > | <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| > | > | > | >|
| > | > | > | >| >| >| You just helped to illustrate his point.
| > | > | > | >| >| >
| > | > | > | >| >| >What makes you think I disagreed with him?
| > | > | > | >| >|
| > | > | > | >| >| What makes you think I thought you did?
| > | > | > | >| >
| > | > | > | >| >What makes you think I thought you think I thought you
| did?
| > | > | > | >|
| > | > | > | >| If this is what you're like when you're (presumably) not
| on
| > | > | drugs, no
| > | > | > | >| wonder you're so afraid of them.
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | >I'm not afraid of drugs, Mike. I'm afraid of all you
| idiots
| > | out
| > | > | there
| > | > | > who
| > | > | > | >have deluded yourselves into thinking you can control your
| > | > | behavior when
| > | > | > | >you're on them.
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | Oh? Are you saying I can't control my behavior?
| > | > | >
| > | > | > If you are using illegal recreational drugs - putting your
| entire
| > | > | lifestyle
| > | > | > at risk - not to mention your wife, children, and extended
| family
| > | who
| > | > | will
| > | > | > have to come visit daddy in prison for the next 5 years if he
| > | gets
| > | > | caught -
| > | > | > you bet thats what I'm saying.
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | > | But alcohol is OK?
| > | >
| > | > Alcohol is legal - within certain boundaries. Understand the
| > | difference?
| > | >
| > |
| > | Don't see why it is because it's just as much a mind altering drug
| as
| > | cocaine is. Why is alcohol legal whereas other drugs aren't?
| >
| > Excellent point - and a completely seperate argument. I'd love to
| exchange
| > ideas on this with you in a brand new thread. Start it if you like.
| My
| > short answer goes something like this: It has to do with taxes and
| revenue
| > for the Federal Government as well as the lobbying power of the
| Alcohol
| > Industry. Think about it. If you made whiskey, would you want pot
| and coke
| > legal?
| >
|
| IOW, the drugs laws make *no sense* whatsoever. So why do you argue
| that they're right?
I don't argue that they're right. I'm argueing that there is no
Constitutional mandate making the use of recreational drugs a "Right" -
therefore the power to decide the issue resides with the States. All you
need to do is get the laws rescinded in your state that make recreational
drugs illegal and *poof* - you get your way. I personally don't care what
drug you like to use - but as long as some of them are illegal, I support
the right of the State and of the People to control that behavior through
legislation.
Do you see the difference?
|
| > |
| > | > |
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | How is it I've managed to do so for as long as I have?
| > | > | >
| > | > | > If you're usig illegal drugs, then its because you haven't
| gotten
| > | > | caught
| > | > | > yet. Besides, how do we know you're controlling it? Because
| > | someone
| > | > | who
| > | > | > assumes the moniker "Mike Helm" - DOB unknown, place of
| residence
| > | > | unknown
| > | > | > says he's controlling it?
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | > | What does it matter to you outside of the fact that the "drug
| war"
| > | > | (which you're losing, BTW) keeps you employed at the detriment
| to
| > | > | society at large?
| > | >
| > | > So you think if drugs were all legalized, everyone in law
| enforcement
| > | would
| > | > be out a job?
| > | >
| > |
| > | A significant portion of them would be. Which would be a good
| thing,
| > | BTW.
| >
| > Maybe. Maybe not. I'd rather have them looking for murderers and
| rapists
| > myself.
| >
|
| Then let's get rid of the truly *wasteful* and *pointless* war on
| drugs. Even looking for murderers and rapists (always after the act
| because it's pretty much impossible for them to stop it) they're not
| that good.
What's your alternative then? Private Security for everyone?
|
| > |
| > | > |
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | Just because you're a bumbling idiot, doesn't mean anyone
| else
| > | is.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > I don't know what your definition of a bumbling idiot is
| > | > |
| > | > | I'd say you're the perfect example of it. In anyone's book.
| > | > | Too bad you're too much of a chickenshit that you have to
| killfile
| > | > | anyone you can't best in rational argument. Par for the course
| for
| > | a
| > | > | cop, most of whom are cowards of the worst kind.
| > | >
| > | > I'm not a cop, "Bittpirate",
| > |
| > | But I'm sure you wish you were, don't you "Ravage"?
| >
| > Not really. I don't have the personality or temperment for it. I
| think
| > people do and say things to police officers that they wouldn't think
| of
| > saying or doing to Joe Blow out on the street because they know a
| police
| > officer is extremely limited in how he is permitted to respond.
|
| Never dealt with a police officer, have you? People say things to
| police officers they wouldn't say to others because police officers
| *do* things to them nobody else would. Namely abusing, harrassing,
| terrorizing, and infringing upon the civil rights of the general
| public. They get less abuse than they deserve and furthermore have the
| means to take revenge on those who don't pay them their "due respect"
| to stroke their fragile egos. And then they're in charge of
| investigating their own abuses! Nobody else in civilian society gets
| that kind of latitude. Nobody.
No, I can't say that I've had that much contact with the police. What
contact I have had has always been very professional. Now I'm certain
they've got their problem employees - but who doesn't?
|
| >You talk to
| > me like that and I might be just as likely to shoot your stupid *****
|
| Riiiiiight. In a Libertarian society, those who shoot for simple
| insults would die fast. Nobody with a hothead would last for long.
That's exactly my point. When there are no repurcussions for acting out in
violence to another persons transgressions, its amazing how polite and civil
everyone becomes, isn't it?
|
| >- or at
| > the very least knock the cat ***** out of you and walk away without
| > repurcussion. If I was a police officer, I couldn't get away with
| that.
| >
|
| Sure you couldn't. They get away with it all the time. Even the cases
| which are brought to light represent a small fraction of the abuse they
| bring upon common citizens. What most people would go to prison for
| life for they get to do every day with sanction. Because it's their
| job.
Cite?
|
| > |
| > | > but let me ask you a question -
| > | > You think this childish comment of yours constitutes an
| "argument"?
| > | > You really believe people that operate at your mental capacity
| > | deserve to be
| > | > responded to?
| > | >
| > |
| > | Why do you do it then?
| >
| > I'm hoping people can get back on track with the discussion instead
| of
| > trailing off on these silly personal attack side bars. This is a
| discussion
| > about the legality of recreational drug use. It isn't about you or
| me
| > personally.
| >
|
| Nonsense. You're not here for serious discussion about the legality of
| drug laws. You're an apologist for State oppression and attack anyone
| who doesn't bow down to it as "children."
I'd say I'm more of a realist.
For example. I'm thinking right now that if this whole issue of
recreational drug use was really that important to you, why are you wasting
valuable tie on Usenet rather than marshalling the resources necessary to
get the laws changed in your community?
|
| > |
| > | > I don't often answer you for one reason, "Buttpirate" - because
| doing
| > | so
| > | > would be like getting into a "My dad's bigger than your dad"
| argument
| > | with a
| > | > five year old.
| > |
| > | That's your explanation, but of course you and me both know that
| isn't
| > | the reason why you do it, "Ravage." You do it because you can't
| answer
| > | the argument. Now run away with your tail tucked between your
| legs.
| >
| > You haven't made an argument, Buttpirate. You've launched into
| childish
| > personal attacks.
|
| Of which a moron like you deserves. You're a retard and have proven it
| quite clearly in this thread. By extension, anyone who treats you as
| anything other than a retard is acting in a retarded manner. There's
| no point in treating you seriously if you're going to handwave all
| others as "pointless" or "children."
lmao....
Psssssstttt!
I'm not the guy who doesn't understand how the government works and am
sitting in a newsgroup spouting silly personal attacks thinking this will
somehow make my illegal drugs legal.
Am I?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scout" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
05 Feb 2005 05:07:14 PM |
|
|
"Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net> wrote in message
news:FE8Nd.897$yr.685@okepread05...
"Rump Ranger" <buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
news:1107628319.119845.15930@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
|
| Ravage wrote:
| > "Rump Ranger" <buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
| > news:1107603314.965042.282490@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
| > |
| > | Ravage wrote:
| > | > <buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
| > | > news:1107555265.273548.116310@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
| > | > |
| > | > | Ravage wrote:
| > | > | > "Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| > | > | > news:d6kvv09ne2hu6rg105f60ormeuc6hlnk0n@4ax.com...
| > | > | > | On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 05:19:49 -0700, "Ravage"
| > | > | <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | >"Mike Z. Helm" <mhelm@not.known> wrote in message
| > | > | > | >news:tgntv0p38rarjt468dld3fqclj511g2atq@4ax.com...
| > | > | > | >| On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 09:30:58 -0700, "Ravage"
| > | > | <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net>
| > | > | > | >|
| > | > | > | >| >| >| You just helped to illustrate his point.
| > | > | > | >| >| >
| > | > | > | >| >| >What makes you think I disagreed with him?
| > | > | > | >| >|
| > | > | > | >| >| What makes you think I thought you did?
| > | > | > | >| >
| > | > | > | >| >What makes you think I thought you think I thought you
| did?
| > | > | > | >|
| > | > | > | >| If this is what you're like when you're (presumably) not
| on
| > | > | drugs, no
| > | > | > | >| wonder you're so afraid of them.
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | >I'm not afraid of drugs, Mike. I'm afraid of all you
| idiots
| > | out
| > | > | there
| > | > | > who
| > | > | > | >have deluded yourselves into thinking you can control your
| > | > | behavior when
| > | > | > | >you're on them.
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | Oh? Are you saying I can't control my behavior?
| > | > | >
| > | > | > If you are using illegal recreational drugs - putting your
| entire
| > | > | lifestyle
| > | > | > at risk - not to mention your wife, children, and extended
| family
| > | who
| > | > | will
| > | > | > have to come visit daddy in prison for the next 5 years if he
| > | gets
| > | > | caught -
| > | > | > you bet thats what I'm saying.
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | > | But alcohol is OK?
| > | >
| > | > Alcohol is legal - within certain boundaries. Understand the
| > | difference?
| > | >
| > |
| > | Don't see why it is because it's just as much a mind altering drug
| as
| > | cocaine is. Why is alcohol legal whereas other drugs aren't?
| >
| > Excellent point - and a completely seperate argument. I'd love to
| exchange
| > ideas on this with you in a brand new thread. Start it if you like.
| My
| > short answer goes something like this: It has to do with taxes and
| revenue
| > for the Federal Government as well as the lobbying power of the
| Alcohol
| > Industry. Think about it. If you made whiskey, would you want pot
| and coke
| > legal?
| >
|
| IOW, the drugs laws make *no sense* whatsoever. So why do you argue
| that they're right?
I don't argue that they're right. I'm argueing that there is no
Constitutional mandate making the use of recreational drugs a "Right" -
therefore the power to decide the issue resides with the States.
So you are admitting that all the federal drug laws are Unconstitutional???
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rump Ranger" |
|
| Title: Re: Do police officers serve and protect the public? |
05 Feb 2005 06:41:40 PM |
|
|
Scout wrote:
"Ravage" <ronsam-skipthis-@cox.net> wrote in message
news:FE8Nd.897$yr.685@okepread05...
"Rump Ranger" <buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
news:1107628319.119845.15930@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
|
| Ravage wrote:
| > "Rump Ranger" <buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
| > news:1107603314.965042.282490@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
| > |
| > | Ravage wrote:
| > | > <buttpirate@fadmail.com> wrote in message
| > | >
news:1107555265.273548.116310@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
| > | > |
| > | > | Ravage wrote:
| > | > | > " | | | | | | | | | | | | |
