It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

State Senator: "My Home isn't Threatened By ISIS. My Home is Threatened by Police"

page: 4
41
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 08:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: works4dhs

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: grandmakdw
What I see are a bunch of immature whiners.

You think the police are terrible, awful, wretched examples of human beings, whose only goal is to harass and harm people of color.

But when you are being threatened or harmed, you want these terrible, awful, wretched examples of human beings to run to your rescue.

Do you not realize how ridiculous that is. To name call them in one breath and demand they protect you in the next breath?

Of course I was being tongue in cheek with my statement on page 1.

It was simply an extension on the other side of the henious things many of the posters were saying about police.

Yet when I pointed out, if you think they are so awful, then keep them away from people who think the police are worse than ISIS and likely to behead/rape/or burn you alive;
then why on earth would you want them to protect you? Doesn't make sense.

Most police I know are decent human beings, with families, who care about their job and are doing their best daily. Too bad 99% of you posting here refuse to say even one decent thing about these people who do put their lives on the line daily for you.

You hate the police, fine, just don't call them when you need them, don't be hypocrites or worse yet bipolar about what you think of police.


What I find funny about replies like this are they usually come from people who claim they want smaller governments and for governments to stay out of people's lives.

What I've come to realize is they don't want government to interfere with their lives. But they have no problem with government interfering with, harassing, or brutalizing other American lives. Especially if those other Americans are different from them, or don't share the same views.


Since you sound like you're pro-law enforcement, why don't you agree with the US Constitution (you know, the supreme law of America)?


People like me have no problem with the police interfering with the lives and careers of criminals, especially violent ones.
Speaking of the Constitution, it says the government is responsible to provide for the common defense and enforce the laws. Nothing about subsidized housing or bureaucrat-run health care. We need a government that will perform its basic functions and no more.


A person is only a "criminal" after they're been convicted of a crime. Until conviction, they're only "suspects". And all suspects are supposed to be treated as innocent until proven guilty. That's the whole point of having a court system. The accuser (be it individuals or a government) present their case against a suspect; the suspects defend themselves; and the courts decide the outcome. If an outcome isn't satisfactory to either party, they can appeal to a higher court to overturn the verdict. This process continues until either the higher courts refuse to hear the case or until the Supreme court hears it. That's also American law, for the record.

And what do housing and health care have to do with people getting treated equally under the law? We're Americans too. So why shouldn't we be treated equally as Americans by American law enforcement or American courts? Since you quoted my post, I'm assuming you read the part with Section 1 of the US Constitution. So why can't we have the rights Section 1 of the US Constitution gives us? That's why I find it hypocritical when people who claim they are pro-law enforcement conveniently ignore or outright oppose the parts of American law that they don't agree with. It doesn't work like that.


www.odmp.org...

this is why the police must use extreme caution and self defense when dealing with 'suspects'. TFC Plank was shot and killed during a routine traffic stop. Police have been shot in Boston, NY and Ferguson in he last two weeks. So you blame them for being edgy and defensive, even aggressive?
there is no widespread police-on-citizen violence. that is a media myth fueled by idiot self-serving politicians like Senator Chambers. the fact that we are even debating alleged police-on-citizen violence in this thread shows how leftist politicians/media are succeeding in dividing us.
as I stated earlier, thousands of 'suspects' are arrested, questioned, processed and released with no incidents. the problem is a handful of violent idiots who bring violence on themselves.
John Law is not the problem. He/she is the solution. work with.




posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 11:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: works4dhs

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: works4dhs

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: grandmakdw
What I see are a bunch of immature whiners.

You think the police are terrible, awful, wretched examples of human beings, whose only goal is to harass and harm people of color.

But when you are being threatened or harmed, you want these terrible, awful, wretched examples of human beings to run to your rescue.

Do you not realize how ridiculous that is. To name call them in one breath and demand they protect you in the next breath?

Of course I was being tongue in cheek with my statement on page 1.

It was simply an extension on the other side of the henious things many of the posters were saying about police.

Yet when I pointed out, if you think they are so awful, then keep them away from people who think the police are worse than ISIS and likely to behead/rape/or burn you alive;
then why on earth would you want them to protect you? Doesn't make sense.

Most police I know are decent human beings, with families, who care about their job and are doing their best daily. Too bad 99% of you posting here refuse to say even one decent thing about these people who do put their lives on the line daily for you.

You hate the police, fine, just don't call them when you need them, don't be hypocrites or worse yet bipolar about what you think of police.


What I find funny about replies like this are they usually come from people who claim they want smaller governments and for governments to stay out of people's lives.

What I've come to realize is they don't want government to interfere with their lives. But they have no problem with government interfering with, harassing, or brutalizing other American lives. Especially if those other Americans are different from them, or don't share the same views.


Since you sound like you're pro-law enforcement, why don't you agree with the US Constitution (you know, the supreme law of America)?


People like me have no problem with the police interfering with the lives and careers of criminals, especially violent ones.
Speaking of the Constitution, it says the government is responsible to provide for the common defense and enforce the laws. Nothing about subsidized housing or bureaucrat-run health care. We need a government that will perform its basic functions and no more.


A person is only a "criminal" after they're been convicted of a crime. Until conviction, they're only "suspects". And all suspects are supposed to be treated as innocent until proven guilty. That's the whole point of having a court system. The accuser (be it individuals or a government) present their case against a suspect; the suspects defend themselves; and the courts decide the outcome. If an outcome isn't satisfactory to either party, they can appeal to a higher court to overturn the verdict. This process continues until either the higher courts refuse to hear the case or until the Supreme court hears it. That's also American law, for the record.

And what do housing and health care have to do with people getting treated equally under the law? We're Americans too. So why shouldn't we be treated equally as Americans by American law enforcement or American courts? Since you quoted my post, I'm assuming you read the part with Section 1 of the US Constitution. So why can't we have the rights Section 1 of the US Constitution gives us? That's why I find it hypocritical when people who claim they are pro-law enforcement conveniently ignore or outright oppose the parts of American law that they don't agree with. It doesn't work like that.


www.odmp.org...

this is why the police must use extreme caution and self defense when dealing with 'suspects'. TFC Plank was shot and killed during a routine traffic stop. Police have been shot in Boston, NY and Ferguson in he last two weeks. So you blame them for being edgy and defensive, even aggressive?
there is no widespread police-on-citizen violence. that is a media myth fueled by idiot self-serving politicians like Senator Chambers. the fact that we are even debating alleged police-on-citizen violence in this thread shows how leftist politicians/media are succeeding in dividing us.
as I stated earlier, thousands of 'suspects' are arrested, questioned, processed and released with no incidents. the problem is a handful of violent idiots who bring violence on themselves.
John Law is not the problem. He/she is the solution. work with.


Interesting. You quoted my post then ignored nearly all of it. What does that have to do with treating all Americans equally? Or following "due process" by trying suspects in court to determine their innocence or guilt? Or with following Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution? Or with law enforcement & the pro-police crowd selectively choosing which laws to enforce?

And yes, there have been attacks on police officers. Does that mean that every person is a criminal because of it? You realize that "collective punishment" is illegal, right? Oh, I forgot, "law enforcement" only applies to enforcing laws they want to enforce. But since we're considering every suspect a criminal because of the "bad apples", is it ok to consider every police officer a criminal because of their "bad apples"?

Also, nobody's making anyone be a police officer. Officers aren't drafted nor enslaved by the system. In other words, if a specific officer thinks it's too dangerous, he or she can always find another form of employment. Though they should be careful since contrary to what you may think, there are many American jobs that are more dangerous than being a police officer.



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 03:59 PM
link   
I'm trying to stay on the thread topic. Sen Chamber's vicious slander of the police has nothing to do with the overall 'police state' paranoia.
I'm sure there are dangerous jobs out there but I don't know of any which require you to approach a total stranger not knowing if they are aiming a weapon at you. If you have ideas to make this safer let's hear them. It's not like police approach every suspect with drawn weapon. How about supporting law enforcement instead of 'find another job' (not very compassionate on your part).



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 04:01 PM
link   
"Other members are now apparently calling for his resignation."

and so it goes...



posted on Mar, 31 2015 @ 06:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: works4dhs
I'm trying to stay on the thread topic. Sen Chamber's vicious slander of the police has nothing to do with the overall 'police state' paranoia.
I'm sure there are dangerous jobs out there but I don't know of any which require you to approach a total stranger not knowing if they are aiming a weapon at you. If you have ideas to make this safer let's hear them. It's not like police approach every suspect with drawn weapon. How about supporting law enforcement instead of 'find another job' (not very compassionate on your part).


"Vicious slander". Really? "Slander" is a legal definition and has set conditions which must be met for words to be considered "slander". That's American law, by the way. So something isn't classified as "slander" just because you don't agree with it. Law enforcement should know that.

Also, you're not asking for "support". You're asking for obedience & trust. Law enforcement is supposed to serve the public, not the other way around. If anything, why don't you and our law enforcement support the American citizens that are being treated unfairly & unequally by the rest of our justice system? And why should we trust people who can't even admit when they make mistakes, much less ones who selectively choose which laws they're even going to enforce?

Also, why won't you address what I keep bringing up about treating all citizens equally? That's the entire point of this thread, that a state senator feels more threatened by police here than by a terrorist group on the other side of the world. And I agree with him. I'm more likely to get "stopped & frisked" by a police than I am by ISIS; more likely to have my house door kicked in in a "no-knock raid" by police than I am by ISIS; and I'm more likely to get beat down or shot for standing up for my rights by police than I am by ISIS. Those are facts.

Also, why won't you address Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution? I keep bringing it up so I know you had to read it.


Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


And I'll say it again since you act like you're pro-law enforcement. Why don't you agree with the supreme law of America, the US Constitution? And why is it so hard for police to enforce the supreme law of America, the US Constitution?



new topics

 
41
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join