For the "Cop Hater" fan bois...
Educate yourselves!
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (35)
sorted by:
What in the world does ANY of this have to do with "Qualified Immunity"?
Why yes, we ARE aware of your Liberal Left Wing(nut) Arguing Checklist tactics.
You failingly tried to utilize #4 because you couldn't refute the original topic of qualified immunity.
Get back on topic. Or are you going to simply resort to something else on the ole Liberal Left Wing(nut) Arguing Checklist?
Actually you failed to answer my question about qualified immunity. Why are citizens not allowed that luxury? Classifying law enforcement as citizens doesn't answer the question. It is not afforded to the average citizen, you must join the club to get it, you see what I mean? They are civil servants, I cannot fathom why they would require more protection than the citizens they don't have to protect.
And seeing the State of the Republic lends to the notion that they are seriously not doing as they should be.
It certainly does. Qualified immunity applies to ALL GOVERNMENT/PUBLIC OFFICIALS. Not just law enforcement. It applies to judges, Clerk of Court secretaries, federal, state, county, and city attorneys and their staff, city garbage collectors, city and county fire, building and other inspectors, ANYBODY who works for a governmental entity. Are they all not citizens? Do you even think?
Which clearly shows why you would never have ever been considered for a position on the Supreme Court. You simply don't get to place law enforcement officers in a "Damned if you do AND damned if you don't." situation. And it's not more protection, it's sufficiently minimum appropriate protection.
AGAIN: “A policeman’s lot is not so unhappy that he must choose between being charged with dereliction of duty if he does not arrest when he has probable cause, and being mulcted in damages if he does,” ~ Chief Justice Earl Warren
I'll reword the question: why are normal citizens not holding a seat under government not allowed the same luxury? If you cannot see how having a set of citizens with more freedoms than another is a problem I do not know if you are aware of what the United States actually is. This does not fly in a republic which is why I suggested the changes that I did and why I am as adamant as I am. The operation is illegal at large. The fact that it exists as it does today is testimony that they do not do as they are said to do. Government officials shouldn't be allowed a position that they can make mistakes without due burden but the average citizen cannot. That is kind of like a monarchy.
Doesn't matter though. It is being rectified.
I will leave you with this again.
https://www.justice.gov/crt/deprivation-rights-under-color-law
TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
My freedoms and rights as a citizen are clearly laid out. All the fancy wording in the world cannot hide them. Obligations levied against my Freedoms and Rights are unconstitutional, tyrannical if you would. Treason.
Just because it started long ago doesn't give anyone a pass that is partaking today.
No, you're not simply rewording the question, you're "MOVING THE GOAL POSTS" since your original argument failed on account of your ignorance. We all can see that very easily. By the way, that's #5 on the ole;
Liberal Left Wing(nut) Arguing Checklist.
Let's see which liberal argument tactic he uses next, shall we?
What a neat list!
I do not recall changing the narrative one bit, I suggested changes in the structure based off the information that you provided me and information that I provided you. Do let me know if I check another box without knowing, I can be quite absent minded.
I think that you are guilty of number 4 and 5 right now, maybe 2
ummm... ism!!!
Am i doing it right?
Why no, you are not. But then I suspect that's a result of your common core liberal educa,... errr,....indoctrination.
And we are all still waiting for your proof of all those arrests for not wearing masks that YOU state exist. I, and all the other readers, have noticed that you seem to be avoiding producing the proof to support your assertion. Or, are you ready to admit that such arrests for not wearing a mask DON'T EXIST?
I never asserted that anyone was getting into trouble for not wearing masks by the police. That was someone else. Who is changing the goal posts now, or is this forum sliding? It is so hard to keep up with all the hip, cool, lingo!
That is actually down right slander, I think, asserting that I had done something that I haven't. I am going to be honest, I do not know.
Here is some of that sweet illegal enforcement though; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1uDbObybso
I think it is kind of obvious who is who in this conversation.
Have a good day!
Also, while I have you, why are some Citizens treated to special circumstances under Law and others are not? I am going to find a way to ask this question that you will answer!
Cheap shot, I know but I cannot resist!
Calls me liberally indoctrinated
Doesn't know what a Republic is
^^^Ah yes, typical liberal. ^^^
Arguing with a liberal is like playing chess with a rooster. No matter how well you play chess, the rooster just knocks over all the pieces, craps on the board, spews some profanities, and struts around like a rooster who thinks (s)he's won.
Another common mistake is to assume that a liberal will know when he is beaten. You may think you have scored a clear victory by not only citing the appropriate authority on each matter but utterly humiliating the liberal in the process – and yet (s)he will keep coming back for more punishment.
You simply can't slap liberals in the face because their head is generally protected by their butt cheeks.
What you must understand here is that liberals have no sense of dignity. They are quite willing to be humiliated and taunted in the service of their righteousness. Crawling through slime and offal does not offend them; living the lives they do, of course, many of them are quite accustomed to it.
It's the unspoken truth of liberal socialists that they crave subjugation. The bright lure of freedom diminishes their life's joy in a mad scramble for power. For identity. They were made to be ruled. In the end, they will always kneel.
And note; Nothing he's replied with so far is the product of original critical thinking. Just simple reliance on the ole Liberal Left Wing(nut) Arguing Checklist.
It's almost as if I'm dealing with a child.