Video shows Minneapolis cops slashing tires of Medical Workers.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: rickymouse

The key word in your statement being mostly...
So some were privately owned cars who are possibly now left with no means of transportation till the come up with the money to get their car towed to a safe place where their car can be jacked up and four tires to be replace...
Till they come up with the money to buy 4 tires to replace them.. and, possibly, pay someone to do the labor...
And, oh, Hertz is going bankrupt so that means no harm done?? So... all those rental cars were rented from hertz??

You are just trying to diminish the harm that was done so the police actions seem more reasonable..

Complain to the ones who sent the cops there to imobilize cars deemed a possible risk. Orders came from high up, from some major government group overseeing all of the stuff in that area. Cops were just following orders. Oh by the way, the group that gave the orders may not have been cops, you would have to check who is on that committee.

a reply to: rickymouse

Be careful, you’ll get labeled again.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: rickymouse

Be careful, you’ll get labeled again.

So, Am I going to be labeled as a rent a car hater, or someone who hates those committees that screw things up and pass on the blame to the people below them?

I have read evidence on both sides, the evidence from the protestor backers is narrow minded, they need to look at the whole picture, it turns out they were under orders to do this, you have to look where the orders came from.

"The Anoka County Sheriff’s Lieutenant Andy Knotz said that county deputies followed orders from the state’s Multiagency Command Center to join the patrol and slash tires." www.forbes.com...

dps.mn.gov...

Maybe I am going to be labeled as someone who is a debunker or something, someone with OCD about finding the whole truth, someone who doesn't like to jump to conclusions. The cops did the deed but were under orders to do it, target the ones that gave the orders.

originally posted by: rickymouse
I have read evidence on both sides, the evidence from the protestor backers is narrow minded, they need to look at the whole picture, it turns out they were under orders to do this, you have to look where the orders came from.

'I was just following orders', the clarion call of every government flunky alive and not a legitimate excuse as proved by the Nuremberg hearings.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: rickymouse
I have read evidence on both sides, the evidence from the protestor backers is narrow minded, they need to look at the whole picture, it turns out they were under orders to do this, you have to look where the orders came from.

'I was just following orders', the clarion call of every government flunky alive and not a legitimate excuse as proved by the Nuremberg hearings.

I didn’t know the Nuremberg hearings where centered around the constitutionality of slashing tires in Germany? Who knew?
Which raises the question. Should the individuals be charge with war crimes? How about those rioting and torching the businesses of non-combatants?

a reply to: neutronflux

The point was it showed very clearly that, 'I was just following orders', is not an excuse.

It's a lame attempt to absolve ones self from guilt despite knowing the actions were wrong and in this case after having lied about it.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: neutronflux

The point was it showed very clearly that, 'I was just following orders', is not an excuse.

It's a lame attempt to absolve ones self from guilt despite knowing the actions were wrong and in this case after having lied about it.

That wasn’t the argument.

Which raises the question. Should the individuals be charge with war crimes? How about those rioting and torching the businesses of non-combatants?

a reply to: neutronflux

Do you always ask banal questions you already know the answer to?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: neutronflux

Do you always ask banal questions you already know the answer to?

Oh. I forget. You don’t answer questions. You just try to bully people into posting what you want to see.

a reply to: neutronflux

I answer plenty of questions, yours were just utterly moronic though.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

What does that have to do with, “ Oh. I forget. You don’t answer questions. You just try to bully people into posting what you want to see.“

Still trying to bully people into submission. Nice.

a reply to: neutronflux

Your questions about war crimes are purposefully stupid.

But to humor you, since you seem to require humoring, the answers are no to both.

Feel better?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: rickymouse
You would think that News Reporters would need to get proper permitting to be able to film a protest or riots.

Proper permitting? What TF are you on about? It's the First Amendment, FFS.

So then you shouldn't have to jump through hoops to exercise the Second Amendment then right?

a reply to: rickymouse

Gee, if things really worked that way, there would be at least a few from the bush administration sitting in jail cells for the torture of Iraqis instead of a group of low level kids who were just following orders..

Personally, I dont care who you want to hold responsible, the actual tire slashers or those who gave the orders... they both should hold some responsibility. But, the harm done cant be so easily discounted nor should it be justified or excused. Like I said, it would be a bitch if one of those cars belonged to someone who's business had been looted and burned while the cops just followed orders and let the rampage go on unhindered just to then have all the tires of his car slashed by the very same caps that stood by and let all hell reign in the city and let his business burn to the ground!!

Licensed cars parked legally . . . can
result having the police slash your tires ? yet . . .
concealed gun permits are not an issue because
the state claims only cars can be a weapon ?
Follow the $.
The military state has a bad stench.

originally posted by: ToneDeaf
Licensed cars parked legally . . . can
result having the police slash your tires ? yet . . .
concealed gun permits are not an issue because
the state claims only cars can be a weapon ?
Follow the $.
The military state has a bad stench.

I know quite a few liberals lately that are buying guns and Ammo. So much for just conservatives buying guns. I have guns, and until about five years ago I was pretty much a liberal Democrat....till I started seeing how weird the liberals were getting, not following the rules, yet demanding the Conservatives to follow the rules.

originally posted by: uninspired
So then you shouldn't have to jump through hoops to exercise the Second Amendment then right?

You should not.