Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Btowner

Dead gerrymandering architect's files

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, CreepingDeath said:

Just one question:  is it okay to threaten police officers?

Is it okay to arrest people for not committing a crime?

 

Wouldn't you resist an illegal arrest?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TitanDuckFan said:

Is it okay to arrest people for not committing a crime?

 

Wouldn't you resist an illegal arrest?

One thing you can say about tards, they would shit their britches if a cop ask them a question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mythos27 said:

So you would support democrats doing the same in the future if they also want to avoid a vote? Would you also support them threatening death to police officers if they try to do their jobs by arresting them? Is this really the new normal?

It doesn't matter if I support them or not.  I am not a Dem and I'm not one of their constituents.

But that's the rule, and if they feel strongly enough about it, they should do what they can to represent their constituents.

The rule is embedded in the state's constitution.  It's been there since the 1800s.  I'm sure this is not the 1st, or the 2nd or the last time it will be used.

Sometimes gridlock is preferable to the wrong law.

 

It's kind of like bitching about tax "loopholes."

Don't blame the guy that saves money  by taking advantage of the loophole, or the tax preparer that makes his client aware of said loophole.

Somebody wrote that loophole into the tax code.

If you disagree with it, blame that person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, CreepingDeath said:

By shooting a cop?!  Cons are exposed. 

Nobody shot a cop.

The gov overstepped her authority by claiming she'd send the cops to arrest people that have/had committed no crime.

Get that straight.  The GOP state senators did NOT commit a crime by leaving the capitol or the state.

 

Now, if you *think* it's okay to arrest people for political purposes, then we have a problem.  I get the distinct impression there's a number of people here who think that's okay.  And that means we have a big problem.

Newsflash:  It's not ok. 

And if there's cops stupid enough to follow illegal orders and attempt to carry them out, then I am pretty certain we're going to lose some cops.

 

The funny part about all this is no one has interviewed the state police spox.

The mainstream media wouldn't dare.

Because he would explain the fact that no one has sworn out a complaint, and no judge has issued a warrant

And most of all, no one has the power to arrest anyone based on a political whim.

 

For that, you can be thankful.

Edited by TitanDuckFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rogue   
19 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said:

Nobody shot a cop.

The gov overstepped her authority by claiming she'd send the cops to arrest people that have/had committed no crime.

Get that straight.  The GOP state senators did NOT commit a crime by leaving the capitol or the state.

 

Now, if you *think* it's okay to arrest people for political purposes, then we have a problem.  I get the distinct impression there's a number of people here who think that's okay.  And that means we have a big problem.

Newsflash:  It's not ok. 

And if there's cops stupid enough to follow illegal orders and attempt to carry them out, then I am pretty certain we're going to lose some cops.

 

The funny part about all this is no one has interviewed the state police spox.

The mainstream media wouldn't dare.

Because he would explain the fact that no one has sworn out a complaint, and no judge has issued a warrant

And most of all, no one has the power to arrest anyone based on a political whim.

 

For that, you can be thankful.

https://www.apnews.com/1a3dd1c7c6424a4f9b71226e3d5c7e32

 

Quote

Oregon State Police can force any senators they track down in Oregon into a patrol car to return them to the Capitol, although the agency said in a statement that it would use “polite communication” and patience to bring the rogue lawmakers back.

 

This article suggests the governor is within her rights to order the police to escort the senators back to the capital, and thus not illegal. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Rogue said:

https://www.apnews.com/1a3dd1c7c6424a4f9b71226e3d5c7e32

 

 

This article suggests the governor is within her rights to order the police to escort the senators back to the capital, and thus not illegal. 

 

The 5 day old article does suggest that.

Local news is, it isn't going to happen because anything resembling an arrest would put the governor in violation of the law, along with any cop foolish enough to carry out the order.  I have the word of a judge friend and a state cop friend on that one.

Civil suits and criminal charges would ensue, and it would get REALLY ugly REALLY fast, and Ghu help her if anyone gets injured.

 

The gov does have the power to fine them though, so we'll see if she follows through, and then watch the donations roll in from their constituents to pay them should she take that step.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mythos27   
2 hours ago, TitanDuckFan said:

It doesn't matter if I support them or not.  I am not a Dem and I'm not one of their constituents.

But that's the rule, and if they feel strongly enough about it, they should do what they can to represent their constituents.

The rule is embedded in the state's constitution.  It's been there since the 1800s.  I'm sure this is not the 1st, or the 2nd or the last time it will be used.

Sometimes gridlock is preferable to the wrong law.

 

It's kind of like bitching about tax "loopholes."

Don't blame the guy that saves money  by taking advantage of the loophole, or the tax preparer that makes his client aware of said loophole.

Somebody wrote that loophole into the tax code.

If you disagree with it, blame that person.

 

I'm sorry but this really just sounds like you're fine with it if it benefits "your side" against it if it doesn't. Also, threatening violence against police isn't a political issue, it's one of basic right or wrong. It can't be that our tribalism crosses even that line. As far as your tax analogy, it's a complete logical fallacy. I don't have to pick someone to blame because I can choose to hold all parties involved at least partly involved responsible. This example also falls rather hollow from someone who doesn't want to do anything about closing loopholes and making people pay what they agreed to by doing business and living in the U.S. 

Edited by Mythos27

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Mythos27 said:

 

I'm sorry but this really just sounds like you're fine with it if it benefits "your side" against it if it doesn't. Also, threatening violence against police isn't a political issue, it's one of basic right or wrong. It can't be that our tribalism crosses even that line. As far as your tax analogy, it's a complete logical fallacy. I don't have to pick someone to blame because I can choose to hold all parties involved at least partly involved responsible. This example also falls rather hollow from someone who doesn't want to do anything about closing loopholes and making people pay what they agreed to by doing business and living in the U.S. 

The only "logical fallacy" here is your apparent notion that it's okay for the police to break the law because they're the police.  No judge, no warrant, no arrest. 

Anything else is just KKKate and her Jack-Boots.

 

I'm not "fine" with it from either side.  But I'm mature enough and pragmatic enough (and pessimistic enough) to understand that it's just politics.

Oregon politics.  Business as usual/Standard Operating Procedure.

 

The Dems passed a sales tax out of the legislature this year too, after decades of Oregonians telling them they don't want one.  It's been on the ballot about 8 times and been resoundingly defeated every time.  They didn't care.  They weren't representing their constituents when they passed it, and they know it.

So they called it a "revenue tax" on businesses, before profits are calculated, that is nothing more than an indirect sales tax.  It's a tax on gross revenues for retailers, not profits. 

But see, at least half the voters have been told it's a tax on "big" business, so their constituents (who are more like you) think it's a good thing.

Never realizing of course that the businesses have no choice but to pass it on to their customers dollar-for-dollar.  Hence, it's a sales tax.

 

I can't stop that either, but I know I don't like it and I know it's going to cost me money, and I know it is being shoved down every citizen's throat with a disingenuous name that tries to disguise what it really is.

 

Welcome to Oregon politics.

You can call it tribalism, but I call it SOP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And apparently, this is not even unique to Oregon politics, if you bothered to read Rogue's link,...

 

Quote

The tactic is rare, but it has been used throughout history. Abraham Lincoln once leapt out of a window in an attempt to deny a quorum when he was a lawmaker in Illinois.

In 2003, Texas Democrats fled to neighboring Oklahoma to deny a quorum, holing up in a Holiday Inn to block a GOP redistricting bill. The Democrats returned to Texas after the bill’s deadline passed, and it was effectively killed.

On Thursday, Oregon’s Senate president pleaded with Republicans to return.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, CreepingDeath said:

Holy shit.  You still haven't answered where you stand on THREATENING a cop.  Jesus christ are Cons thick.

Cons obviously aren't as thick as Libtards.  Libtards are apparently too stupid to understand that when cops are breaking the law, they are no longer worthy of the title of "policeman."  They're no longer protecting and serving their community.

They've become thugs at that point.  Trained, armed thugs with the resources to ruin your life.

He didn't "threaten a cop."  He "threatened" to defend himself.  On legal grounds.

And if you had read any of my more recent posts on the matter with an ounce of insight, you'd have figured that out by now.

 

You have no problem with PoC telling cops where to get off.  From kneeling to brawling to rioting you seem to find that completely understandable.  Yet if a reasonably affluent white guy does it you somehow think that's wrong? 

Why, because he's a Republican?

 

Cops breaking the law don't deserve your respect or your defense.  Quite the opposite.

They deserve everyone's scorn.  More of it than any civilian.

They're cops after all.  They're hired and trained to uphold the law, not break it on orders from a petty tyrant. 

Not for political purposes or any other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
begooode   
31 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said:

Cops breaking the law don't deserve your respect or your defense.  Quite the opposite.

They deserve everyone's scorn.  More of it than any civilian.

They're cops after all.  They're hired and trained to uphold the law, not break it on orders from a petty tyrant. 

Not for political purposes or any other.

Lots of finger wagging here about police being accountable and held to a high standard.  Please extend that same accountability to political leaders that they not engage in inflammatory rhetoric that directly stipulates gun violence.  Shit is already divisive enough and these people are leaders with their words as well as their actions.  It doesn't take much to further the mob mentality / escalation and for a political official to throw that out there is irresponsible at best and potentially harmful.  He should walk it back in some form or other, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, begooode said:

Lots of finger wagging here about police being accountable and held to a high standard.  Please extend that same accountability to political leaders that they not engage in inflammatory rhetoric that directly stipulates gun violence.  Shit is already divisive enough and these people are leaders with their words as well as their actions.  It doesn't take much to further the mob mentality / escalation and for a political official to throw that out there is irresponsible at best and potentially harmful.  He should walk it back in some form or other, imo.

So it's okay for your party's leader to threaten arrests enforced by guns against political opponents for political reasons, but it's not okay for a free person to advocate protecting his/her freedom BAMN, up to and including the use of firearms, on explicit legal grounds.

 

Quote

No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

 

One of them is sabre rattling for political purposes, and the other is sabre rattling on firm constitutional footing.

Yet you're apparently struggling to discern the difference.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
begooode   
5 minutes ago, TitanDuckFan said:

So it's okay for your party's leader to threaten arrests enforced by guns against political opponents for political reasons, but it's not okay for a free person to advocate protecting his/her freedom BAMN, up to and including the use of firearms, on explicit legal grounds.

Nope.  Didn't say that, and I don't have a party; but I'll be damned if the repubs see me anytime soon.

 

Settle the hell down, and don't give me that Duckshit: Don't tread on me, FREEDOOOMZZZZ,  Pack yer bullets, byuk, byuk crap.  If the governor overstepped you can say that without condoning 'your team's' unnecessary inflammatory rhetoric. 

 

You guys try to make everything tribal, like it's some grand call to arms, FIGHT!!  It's not dudes.  It's just not.  Get over yourselves.  The guy shouldn't have said it, and if he got caught up in the moment , he should be accountable and de-escalate the situation he created.  Full stop.  everything else is rah rah horseshit, that unfortunately can lead the weak minded into harm's way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...