police misconduct and abuse to rise skyhigh in the next 4 years

Taft2016 said:
I love freedom, including the freedom to travel.

A sane person would acknowledge that the state is needed to protect my household when I am away from it. The society you envision would collapse within a week.
Click to expand...

As an individual trying to live the way he wants things, that pussy wouldn't last one day.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
if you support random checkpoints, you do not love freedom.


you are wrong, end of story.
Click to expand...

If you support things that allow drunk drivers a greater chance of being on the road, you hate people.

You say you oppose checkpoints yet you haven't said how you would keep drunk drivers off the road. Maybe you don't care that they are on the road and kill innocent people. Maybe you're one of them that thinks if you want to drive drunk the government is violating some right you have to do so.
 
CFM said:
If you support things that allow drunk drivers a greater chance of being on the road, you hate people.

You say you oppose checkpoints yet you haven't said how you would keep drunk drivers off the road. Maybe you don't care that they are on the road and kill innocent people. Maybe you're one of them that thinks if you want to drive drunk the government is violating some right you have to do so.
Click to expand...

there you go making dumbassed assumptions based on your own authoritarian biases again. And my marine corps training, along with my Glock, are quite capable of providing for my own protection, thank you very much.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
there you go making dumbassed assumptions based on your own authoritarian biases again. And my marine corps training, along with my Glock, are quite capable of providing for my own protection, thank you very much.
Click to expand...

It's only an assumption unless you can prove what you claim.

What you've done is let that arrogance get the best of you thinking that what you claim means you're the only one that is capable of handling themselves.
 
CFM said:
It's only an assumption unless you can prove what you claim.
Click to expand...
and you can't prove your claim.

CFM said:
What you've done is let that arrogance get the best of you thinking that what you claim means you're the only one that is capable of handling themselves.
Click to expand...

I advocate for EVERYONES rights and freedoms, how the hell does that mean i'm the only one capable of handling themselves? YOU, on the other hand, fee that nobody is capable of handling themselves and needs to be regulated heavily by rules, regulations, and government enforcers for those that don't.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
and you can't prove your claim.



I advocate for EVERYONES rights and freedoms, how the hell does that mean i'm the only one capable of handling themselves? YOU, on the other hand, fee that nobody is capable of handling themselves and needs to be regulated heavily by rules, regulations, and government enforcers for those that don't.
Click to expand...

Unless you prove what you claim, my claim that it's an assumption is supported.

I'm very capable of handling myself. You're the one that has to bring up the Marines and your Glock. I just handle it. People that have to tell others that they can usually can't.

You don't advocate for everyone's freedom and rights. Does that mean you believe someone has a right to drive drunk and kill others? If you only answer is punish them AFTER they do it, unless that brings back the INNOCENT person, you believe the right of someone to be a criminal is higher than the right of an innocent to life.
 
CFM said:
Unless you prove what you claim, my claim that it's an assumption is supported.

I'm very capable of handling myself. You're the one that has to bring up the Marines and your Glock. I just handle it. People that have to tell others that they can usually can't.

You don't advocate for everyone's freedom and rights. Does that mean you believe someone has a right to drive drunk and kill others? If you only answer is punish them AFTER they do it, unless that brings back the INNOCENT person, you believe the right of someone to be a criminal is higher than the right of an innocent to life.
Click to expand...

that's an absolutely moronic outlook to what is reality. you deserve your title of idiot.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
that's an absolutely moronic outlook to what is reality. you deserve your title of idiot.
Click to expand...

The reality is you're willing to let someone drive drunk because it might hurt their feelings to be told they can't. Reality is even if that guilty person is thrown in jail, the innocent one is still dead and you don't care.

Since you're scared to prove what you claim, you deserve the title of pussy. At least you and your wife have something in common. You're a pussy and she has one.
 
CFM said:
The reality is you're willing to let someone drive drunk because it might hurt their feelings to be told they can't. Reality is even if that guilty person is thrown in jail, the innocent one is still dead and you don't care.
Click to expand...
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson

since I am on the side of the founders and freedom, and you are not, i'm comfortable in what i've stated is real while yours is just horseshit

CFM said:
Since you're scared to prove what you claim, you deserve the title of pussy. At least you and your wife have something in common. You're a pussy and she has one.
Click to expand...

:cheers:
 
SmarterthanYou said:
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson

since I am on the side of the founders and freedom, and you are not, i'm comfortable in what i've stated is real while yours is just horseshit



:cheers:
Click to expand...

Are you saying the founders would have supported innocent people being killed by criminals? If you are, you're an idiot.
 
CFM said:
Are you saying the founders would have supported innocent people being killed by criminals? If you are, you're an idiot.
Click to expand...

you're an idiot for holding that position. supporting the 4th Amendment doesn't mean I have to support innocent people being killed. are you sure you're not desh?

it's better to have 10 guilty go free, than to suffer 1 innocent being imprisoned.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
you're an idiot for holding that position. supporting the 4th Amendment doesn't mean I have to support innocent people being killed. are you sure you're not desh?

it's better to have 10 guilty go free, than to suffer 1 innocent being imprisoned.
Click to expand...

In other words, you think it's better to have 10 killed by a drunk driver than to have 1 showing reasonable cause to be asked to go through a checkpoint. Got it.

If that's how you feel about the 10, it's why I hope someone you love dearly suffers as a result. You'll deserve it.
 
CFM said:
In other words, you think it's better to have 10 killed by a drunk driver than to have 1 showing reasonable cause to be asked to go through a checkpoint. Got it.

If that's how you feel about the 10, it's why I hope someone you love dearly suffers as a result. You'll deserve it.
Click to expand...

and like a liberal, you detest the founders ideas of freedom.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
and like a liberal, you detest the founders ideas of freedom.
Click to expand...

The founders didn't believe the rights of one should involving violating the rights of another. You do. If you're willing to accept the life of an innocent being taken so the guilty can do whatever they want, you don't follow what the founders taught. They weren't anarchists. You are.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
that is absolute bullshit, liberal.

again, absolute bullshit.
Click to expand...

If you believe someone should drive drunk, a crime, and the only thing that should be done if AFTER they take the right to life of an innocent person, it's exactly what you believe. You believe the right of someone to drive drunk is on a higher level than the right to someone not to have their innocent life taken buy one.
 
CFM said:
If you believe someone should drive drunk, a crime, and the only thing that should be done if AFTER they take the right to life of an innocent person, it's exactly what you believe. You believe the right of someone to drive drunk is on a higher level than the right to someone not to have their innocent life taken buy one.
Click to expand...

bull. shit. nowhere in all of this discussion did I EVER say someone had the right to drive drunk and you know it. so you're simply lying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top