• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

I guess Schumer and Pelosi aregoing to start calling more gun control

He means Amy Schumer's cousin Chuck.
You know, just the Senate Minority Leader.

Why would I know the names of your country's politicians?

If I mentioned that Bernardi, Hansen and Leyonhjelm were opposing some new law that Plibersek and Wong had proposed, would you know who all of those people were without resort to Google?

I think Derec works off of a globe that just has America, and everything else blacked out with a single line of white text over Eurasia that just says "Not America"
 
Why would I know the names of your country's politicians?
You participate regularly in a politics forum that is mostly about US politics. So some degree of familiarity with major players is to be assumed, no matter which Sunshine State you hail from.
BTW: there are crocs in our sunshine state too.

If I mentioned that Bernardi, Hansen and Leyonhjelm were opposing some new law that Plibersek and Wong had proposed, would you know who all of those people were without resort to Google?
Well google is a good point. It would have taken you about as long to google who Schumer is as was writing that you didn't know who he was.
 
Last edited:
Mindless personal attacks on Derec are what this forum, dare I say progressivism itself, are all about.
 
Another incompetent buffoon employed as a cop where he is probably more suited to security at the mall parking lot. It's very strange that he shot her through the open window of the police car. That will need some explanation. Must has scared the shit out his partner !
 
He means Amy Schumer's cousin Chuck.
You know, just the Senate Minority Leader.

Why would I know the names of your country's politicians?

If I mentioned that Bernardi, Hansen and Leyonhjelm were opposing some new law that Plibersek and Wong had proposed, would you know who all of those people were without resort to Google?

Honestly? Because we're America.

Our nations politics affect you a whole hell of a lot more than yours effect me ;)
 
Why would I know the names of your country's politicians?

If I mentioned that Bernardi, Hansen and Leyonhjelm were opposing some new law that Plibersek and Wong had proposed, would you know who all of those people were without resort to Google?

Honestly? Because we're America.

Our nations politics affect you a whole hell of a lot more than yours effect me ;)

Meh. I know who your president is (that nice Kenyan fella, right?); that's more than enough detail from my perspective - after all, what's in a name, I can't vote for any of these bozos.
 
Just another example of why police officers should not carry guns, and should instead only carry cameras. And if the footage of an incident isn't provided, their testimony should not be admissible in court. They had the chance to exhonerate themselves through video evidence, but they magically lost it. I say they should magically find themselves stripped of their badges and placed in a rehabilitation program for the criminally inclined.
 
Just another example of why police officers should not carry guns, and should instead only carry cameras. And if the footage of an incident isn't provided, their testimony should not be admissible in court. They had the chance to exhonerate themselves through video evidence, but they magically lost it. I say they should magically find themselves stripped of their badges and placed in a rehabilitation program for the criminally inclined.
There is no excuse for not having any cameras rolling. There are explanations, but not excuses. The cameras are meant to protect both parties in these situations, make the facts clear as to what happened. I can certainly understand how bad and poorly trained police forces would want nothing to do with them, which seems the case here.
 
Just another example of why police officers should not carry guns, and should instead only carry cameras. And if the footage of an incident isn't provided, their testimony should not be admissible in court. They had the chance to exhonerate themselves through video evidence, but they magically lost it. I say they should magically find themselves stripped of their badges and placed in a rehabilitation program for the criminally inclined.
There is no excuse for not having any cameras rolling. There are explanations, but not excuses. The cameras are meant to protect both parties in these situations, make the facts clear as to what happened. I can certainly understand how bad and poorly trained police forces would want nothing to do with them, which seems the case here.

https://sputniknews.com/us/201707201055702310-baltimore-officer-plants-drugs-footage/

The camera always tells the truth.
 
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-40627847

......oh except this time its the cops who shot the gal who called 911 in the first place. Ooops

I guess this isn't going to work out right for Al Sharpton either. She's the wrong color. Doesnt fit his agenda for a Ferguson riot. Oops again.
Do you have a point?

The original point. Schumer and Sharpton really have everything to do with this thread. They both are distracting everyone else from the real issue which is that the police are far too unaccountable to everyone. Instead of shooting as a last resort police are more and more likely shooting as a first resort. This could be fixed with training and different management, but what should be fixed won't be fixed. Because too much other attention (like racism that really does not apply) will make sure the real issue doesn't get addressed. Unlike what Al Sharpton advertises, the police are definitely shooting both whites and blacks out there. This is and continues to be a police problem and NOT a racism problem.

And Schumer and the democrats will tell everyone to give up their guns because the police are "too afraid" of the bad people with guns out on the streets. But just look at this incident. The women was already talking on her phone to the other cop on a call that should not even involve a gun. What kind of threat was that? So once again, this is a police problem and NOT a 2nd amendment issue.

When someone innocent gets shot by the police, yes its bad. But this is a POLICE problem. Not a racism problem and not a gun control problem.

So that is the point, the whole point, and nothing but the whole point.
 
Just another example of why police officers should not carry guns, and should instead only carry cameras.
COmpletely impractical and unfeasible in a country with as many guns as US.
And if the footage of an incident isn't provided, their testimony should not be admissible in court. They had the chance to exhonerate themselves through video evidence, but they magically lost it. I say they should magically find themselves stripped of their badges and placed in a rehabilitation program for the criminally inclined.
You you are saying, screw presumption of innocence; if you are a cop, you need to be presumed guilty.
Typical progressive drivel.

- - - Updated - - -

Meh. I know who your president is (that nice Kenyan fella, right?);
You are several months out of date. Now it's the not so nice fella from New York.

I can't vote for any of these bozos.

Neither can most of us.
 
It is interesting though. Now that the shoe is on the other foot (A black/brown guy unjustly shot some white woman) SUDDENLY everyone fucking cares and thinks there's a police problem.

What do you mean "suddently everyone fucking cares"? The situation is the same for every police shooting - look at the facts of each individual case. Most police shootings are justified, but some are definitely not. This one certainly seems to be unjustified based on information available to us at the time.

Also, Minnesotans blocked interstate highways for Michael Brown (clearly justified shooting), Jamar Clark (clearly justified shooting) and Philandro Castile (probably unjustified, but cop acquitted). There was no blocking of interstates for this case. Neither was the police precinct occupied, as it was for weeks to protest on behalf of St. Jamar.

So it is quite idiotic to say that people didn't care about police shootings before but now "everybody fucking cares". If anything, it's the opposite. Police shootings garner much less attention when it is a white person shot. St. Michael of Ferguson had wall to wall coverage for months.
 
But pretty close.

No, off by a few parsecs.

- - - Updated - - -

Poor Derec.

Why? Because idiots like Kirian keep attacking me for no reason other than personal animosity?

Geez guys. Lay off. Give derec some respect. He did note that BLM people have disproportionate criminal l records. So he is aware of discrimination by whites against blacks in the law. I hear from Breitbart Games he invented one dimensional chess as well.

BTW derec since you acknowledge blacks have records where whites don't have records, can you explain why that is a talking point on this thread?
 
Well, he also didn't start a thread about those two white thug drug dealers that murdered those four would be buyers in PA. We know Derec doesn't give a fuck about white crime.
Have I been posting threads every time black thug drug dealers kill their black would be buyers? I have not.
So your accusations are quite baseless and insulting.
 
He did note that BLM people have disproportionate criminal l records. So he is aware of discrimination by whites against blacks in the law.
So you do not think black people commit more crimes per capita? For example, 5-6 times more murders than whites?
Is the FBI lying?

I hear from Breitbart Games he invented one dimensional chess as well. Is that a derail to far?
No, just typical and expected progressoauthoritarian idiocy that I have come to expect from you and others.
 
Back
Top Bottom