"If they would have just gone home at curfew none of this would be necessary"

a reply to: spirited75

it does not read freely it reads peaceably.

Thank you

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: spirited75

moral: follow the law or face the sometimes seriously fatal consequences. capiche?

Nope, I 100% disagree. See what you are implying? Negates the need for a club, tazer
and mace. Further more the cops are trained not to fire on an unarmed man. Once
the cop had the drop on Brown it should've ended. A whole different thought has to
happen for the decision to fire any way. The cop made a conscious decision to kill
an unarmed kid. A trained officer? Maybe his mace can was empty?

randy do you have any children or nephews and nieces?

i bet you teach them to follow laws right??

when someone is not following the law there can be up to fatal consequences.

it is a good thing to introduce the possibility of serious injury and death into the path of career criminals.

yes i am aware this robber and assaulter was an angel.

originally posted by: spirited75

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: spirited75

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Stormdancer777

Ma'am, forcing a curfew to control a few rioters and looters is the same thing as creating draconian gun laws to prevent a few idiots who would cause harm.

There should never be a justification to curb rights.

the first amendment only protects the right to peacefully assemble.

the second does not protect the right to use a gun to murder or fire on police officers.

curfew is good.

"Curfew is good" unless you want to peacefully assemble.

and they do their deeds under the cover of darkness.

the curfew begins at dark and lasts till 5am beezer.

what responsible trustworthy law abiding person is going to be peacefully demonstrating at 2 am.

use some common sense.

I still don't see how this justifies collective punishment. This is a page right out of Palistine. Someone flashes a gun (allegedly) and you shell a crowd with over 30 canisters of tear gas? I find it remarkable that eye witness accounts put more journalists there than protesters and yet they needed 5 armored tanks.....right.

Interesting to note that when the other side had weapons like the militias backing Clive Bundy a few months back you didn't see this heavy handed behavior. If this shows anything its the defenseless get victimized.

a reply to: spirited75

You're opinions are very clear.

I am all for peaceful assembly.

Could you point out where it says that "peaceful assembly" should only be between the hours of noon to five?

I guess I missed that also.

Thanks in advance.

a reply to: spirited75

This thread is about the curfew there and their right to assemble and at this point the situation has evolved a little beyond a kid killed by a cop.

originally posted by: spirited75
a reply to: Rocker2013

and you are telling me this from the united kingdom?

Yes, the United Kingdom, where we have the Police Complaints Commission, where every time a police officer fires a gun there is a full investigation into the circumstances, where police officers are held directly responsible for every bullet they have, and where firing a weapon is the LAST RESORT and only used when there is a direct threat to life.

In contrast, American cops seem to believe that firing their weapon at someone and ending their life is as easy as pulling someone over for speeding. It's their first response to absolutely anything. Shoot first, aim to kill, ask questions later.

This is not policing by consent, it's an authoritarian armed militia being given the right to execute people and make up an excuse after.

a reply to: beezzer

you used the term freely in your post,
unless you went back and edited it.

the second amendment says peaceably.

originally posted by: angeldoll
Good lord, we've taken leave of our senses? Does "two-sides to every story" ring any bells? Anywhere?

So, it's okay to talk about this, as long as the victim and blacks are portrayed as nothing less than angelic.

It's okay to talk about the police as long as they are presented as devils.

Shooting this young man was wrong. Tearing up this town, getting "free-stuff", from businesses that had to purchase it, is wrong.

Some where in the middle lies the truth.

Exactly, I am as anti big government as the rest of you, are , "SOMETIMES" lol

Because sometimes certain ATS members love big government infringement on rights depending on the situation, lol

But, as terrible as it is that this man had to lose his life for cigars, it is also terrible that the store owners are innocent victims of criminals that could and should protest, PEACEFULLY.

originally posted by: Rocker2013

originally posted by: spirited75
a reply to: Rocker2013

and you are telling me this from the united kingdom?

Yes, the United Kingdom, where we have the Police Complaints Commission, where every time a police officer fires a gun there is a full investigation into the circumstances, where police officers are held directly responsible for every bullet they have, and where firing a weapon is the LAST RESORT and only used when there is a direct threat to life.

In contrast, American cops seem to believe that firing their weapon at someone and ending their life is as easy as pulling someone over for speeding. It's their first response to absolutely anything. Shoot first, aim to kill, ask questions later.

This is not policing by consent, it's an authoritarian armed militia being given the right to execute people and make up an excuse after.

In contrast, American cops seem to believe that firing their weapon at someone and ending their life is as easy as pulling someone over for speeding. It's their first response to absolutely anything. Shoot first, aim to kill, ask questions later.

you know nothing about how police operate in america, and would suggest you read up on how many police officers stop how many citizens compared to the number of police shootings.

originally posted by: spirited75
a reply to: beezzer

you used the term freely in your post,
unless you went back and edited it.

the second amendment says peaceably.

Where does it state that there is an appropriate time and/or time limit to "peaceful assembly"?

a reply to: spirited75

So the kid robbed a store without a gun. He assualted an officer without a gun.

You're right! Calls for nothin but some good ole fashion street justice.
And I tell you this much my wifes boy or any kid in my family were gunned
down like that? That cop may as well reload and try to get to me before
I find out about it. No brag, just fact.

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: spirited75

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: spirited75

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Stormdancer777

Ma'am, forcing a curfew to control a few rioters and looters is the same thing as creating draconian gun laws to prevent a few idiots who would cause harm.

There should never be a justification to curb rights.

the first amendment only protects the right to peacefully assemble.

the second does not protect the right to use a gun to murder or fire on police officers.

curfew is good.

"Curfew is good" unless you want to peacefully assemble.

and they do their deeds under the cover of darkness.

the curfew begins at dark and lasts till 5am beezer.

what responsible trustworthy law abiding person is going to be peacefully demonstrating at 2 am.

use some common sense.

If I want to exercise my rights to assemble freely at 2am, then by god I should be able to!

Freedom doesn't have a time limit.

they were not being peaceable they were shooting at police,
throwing fire bombs, arson, stealing looting and theft.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: spirited75

So the kid robbed a store without a gun. He assualted an officer without a gun.

You're right! Calls for nothin but some good ole fashion street justice.
And I tell you this much my wifes boy or any kid in my family were gunned
down like that? That cop may as well reload and try to get to me before
I find out about it. No brag, just fact.

all blow no show.

do you teach your kids/ relatives kids to follow the law???

originally posted by: Stormdancer777

Exactly, I am as anti big government as the rest of you, are , "SOMETIMES" lol

Because sometimes certain ATS members love big government infringement on rights depending on the situation, lol

But, as terrible as it is that this man had to lose his life for cigars, it is also terrible that the store owners are innocent victims of criminals that could and should protest, PEACEFULLY.

Are you saying that just because someone could do something wrong that the people shouldn't be allowed to do it without a time frame and permission?

originally posted by: EyesOpenMouthShut
a reply to: Stormdancer777

look at that.
Reads like MSM/politican spin.
like a borderline strawman. the curfew wouldn't be needed if police had actually stopped looters

And if they had stopped the looters?

The same people would be complaining.

Why do you think they didn't stop the looting?

a reply to: EyesOpenMouthShut

Are you saying that just because someone could do something wrong that the people shouldn't be allowed to do it without a time frame and permission?

I don't understand the question, help me out I am the village idiot.

Are you saying the people should be allowed to destroy innocent peoples property?

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: spirited75

So the kid robbed a store without a gun. He assualted an officer without a gun.

You're right! Calls for nothin but some good ole fashion street justice.
And I tell you this much my wifes boy or any kid in my family were gunned
down like that? That cop may as well reload and try to get to me before
I find out about it. No brag, just fact.

Randy I get it , but how does this justify attacking the innocent.

The ability to assemble "peacefully" is now a privilege granted by the state.

It is not a right.

If it were a right, then you would be able to freely "peacefully assemble" any damned time you wanted to.

a reply to: randyvs


Let me add this

Do you find it appropriate for the news media to show where this cop lives?

What about his family and their safety?

a reply to: Stormdancer777

Nice red herring.
you seem to think that it's alright for the government to tell these people when they can peaceably assemble.
I asked that question to get clarification on my part.