Ferguson, Missouri - typifies the difference between Conservatives and Liberals

[Iceweasel]

Sweet Jesus. I want one of those. "Go ahead and pull in front of me motherfucker".

Seriously though, I can see why some departments would have those and I doubt it's right wingers they are prepared for. I've been a member of a cop forum for many years and they will not side with the government if push comes to shove. Most are much more aware of the Constitution than the average Joe.

 

[Iceweasel]

As large angry mass protests attract the anarchist/criminal element we have to ask ourselves which we value most, the first amendment or personal property. For many here it is clear they do not value the first amendment rights of everyone because a few shitheads are in the mix. If we used that same rationale for the second amendment where policy is influenced by the very worst that we imagine can happen then gun laws would be a lot more restrictive.

Idiot post of the day. But the day is young. You do not have the right to riot or take over public streets, sidewalks or private property, Einstein.

That said, The US is way behind the times since rioting is fairly rare here. We need to start using water cannons like the Europeans.

 

[Freewill]

Just like in Iraq, the conservative approach is guns, threats, tear gas, swat teams, armored vehicles, automatic weapons.

Then, after the brutality failed, Democrats stepped in to calm the nerves and handle the situation.

We've seen it everywhere Republican policies are implemented.

Here is how democrats calm things down:

Obama has been at war his whole presidency, that is how you calm things down? More fatalities in Afghanistan under Obama then Bush, is that how the democrats calm things down?

BTW, since things turned to crap in Iraq under Obama. He is now giving Bush the credit for removing the troops thus ending the war. Did you miss the memo?

 

[Katzndogz]

Just like in Iraq, the conservative approach is guns, threats, tear gas, swat teams, armored vehicles, automatic weapons.

Then, after the brutality failed, Democrats stepped in to calm the nerves and handle the situation.

We've seen it everywhere Republican policies are implemented.

Gang members have guns, automatric weapons, issue threats "Snitches Get Stiches" in Ferguson was shown, they going to future GOP events?

Ferguson isn't about politics and I gotta say trying to turn it into a political issue is very offensive while an officer is on the world's shit list until he's vidicated (which I'm sure he will be.)

The threat given at the Quik Trip was a threat given to the community as to what happens when a store calls the police when they are robbed. That's what Snitches get Stitches means. That's why this store is ground zero for the rioting.

After throttling the clerk, Michael Brown thought he could as easily throttle a cop. Darren Wilson was taken to the hospital for treatment of the injuries he got from Brown as they were fighting over the gun. Brown was wrong.

 

[occupied]

As large angry mass protests attract the anarchist/criminal element we have to ask ourselves which we value most, the first amendment or personal property. For many here it is clear they do not value the first amendment rights of everyone because a few shitheads are in the mix. If we used that same rationale for the second amendment where policy is influenced by the very worst that we imagine can happen then gun laws would be a lot more restrictive.

Idiot post of the day. But the day is young. You do not have the right to riot or take over public streets, sidewalks or private property, Einstein.

That said, The US is way behind the times since rioting is fairly rare here. We need to start using water cannons like the Europeans.

Maybe we need to ban guns like the Europeans too? I'll never understand why the 1st is highly conditional to conservatives but the 2nd is inviolate to the point that they simply accept the collateral cost of it. Is it so hard to accept the collateral costs of not restricting the 1st amendment as well?

 

[Freewill]

The real difference between liberals and conservatives is that the liberals have no problem with situations like WACO where there is a paramilitary raid of a compound. They defended Clinton and Reno tooth and nail. Conservatives are the ones that protested this offensive attack on civil liberties.

On the other hand the liberals show pictures of cops in riot gear and call that militarization and that they protest. On the other hand conservatives want our police protected as they protect us.

 

[Darkwind]

As large angry mass protests attract the anarchist/criminal element we have to ask ourselves which we value most, the first amendment or personal property. For many here it is clear they do not value the first amendment rights of everyone because a few shitheads are in the mix. If we used that same rationale for the second amendment where policy is influenced by the very worst that we imagine can happen then gun laws would be a lot more restrictive.

A more idiotic post you have never made.

I suppose you think it is impossible to exercise the outrage of overreaching government without damaging private property.

Wow....just.....wow.

 

[Freewill]

As large angry mass protests attract the anarchist/criminal element we have to ask ourselves which we value most, the first amendment or personal property. For many here it is clear they do not value the first amendment rights of everyone because a few shitheads are in the mix. If we used that same rationale for the second amendment where policy is influenced by the very worst that we imagine can happen then gun laws would be a lot more restrictive.

Idiot post of the day. But the day is young. You do not have the right to riot or take over public streets, sidewalks or private property, Einstein.

That said, The US is way behind the times since rioting is fairly rare here. We need to start using water cannons like the Europeans.

Maybe we need to ban guns like the Europeans too? I'll never understand why the 1st is highly conditional to conservatives but the 2nd is inviolate to the point that they simply accept the collateral cost of it. Is it so hard to accept the collateral costs of not restricting the 1st amendment as well?

What does the private ownership of guns have to do with Furgenson and the riots? The only thing I read was their were store owners protecting their stuff with the use of weapons. I guess what they should be doing is using a broom to shoo those rioters away.

 

[2aguy]

You do realize that they have a democrat governor...and that it is democrat economic and social policies that lead to the problems in these cities...from anti education policies to undermining the police to increasing taxes to the point that businesses leave to supporting teenage, single mothers who raise children who raise generation of children raising children on government welfare with no male role models other that criminals and gang members, to spending money on everything but effective police...that is what crates these inner city hell holes...

and then after they destroy the city...the democrats blame republicans...and their useful idiots in the media spread that lie...

 

[Iceweasel]

As large angry mass protests attract the anarchist/criminal element we have to ask ourselves which we value most, the first amendment or personal property. For many here it is clear they do not value the first amendment rights of everyone because a few shitheads are in the mix. If we used that same rationale for the second amendment where policy is influenced by the very worst that we imagine can happen then gun laws would be a lot more restrictive.

Idiot post of the day. But the day is young. You do not have the right to riot or take over public streets, sidewalks or private property, Einstein.

That said, The US is way behind the times since rioting is fairly rare here. We need to start using water cannons like the Europeans.

Maybe we need to ban guns like the Europeans too? I'll never understand why the 1st is highly conditional to conservatives but the 2nd is inviolate to the point that they simply accept the collateral cost of it. Is it so hard to accept the collateral costs of not restricting the 1st amendment as well?

You can't process information, that's the real problem. You ignored what I said, the First is not "conditional", it doesn't enable you to take over public or private property. And maybe gun ownersip is exactly why we have so few riots. The coolateral costs of gun ownership? The collateral cost of taking them away would be much higher. Then there would be no stopping socialists like you.

 

[occupied]

Idiot post of the day. But the day is young. You do not have the right to riot or take over public streets, sidewalks or private property, Einstein.

That said, The US is way behind the times since rioting is fairly rare here. We need to start using water cannons like the Europeans.

Maybe we need to ban guns like the Europeans too? I'll never understand why the 1st is highly conditional to conservatives but the 2nd is inviolate to the point that they simply accept the collateral cost of it. Is it so hard to accept the collateral costs of not restricting the 1st amendment as well?

What does the private ownership of guns have to do with Furgenson and the riots? The only thing I read was their were store owners protecting their stuff with the use of weapons. I guess what they should be doing is using a broom to shoo those rioters away.

Read closely, I am commenting on the vast difference in value conservatives have between the 1st amendment and the second. For gun ownership there can be no restrictions no matter who is getting shot, for mass protests cops need to get in there and put them down before some property gets hurt.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Just like in Iraq, the conservative approach is guns, threats, tear gas, swat teams, armored vehicles, automatic weapons.

Then, after the brutality failed, Democrats stepped in to calm the nerves and handle the situation.

We've seen it everywhere Republican policies are implemented.

Liberals had no problem with the excessive use of force by law enforcement when it came to Branch Davidian Waco Tx and Elian Gonzalez.

 

[Nova78]

Obama has lost total control , we are a destroyed nation.

 

[Freewill]

Maybe we need to ban guns like the Europeans too? I'll never understand why the 1st is highly conditional to conservatives but the 2nd is inviolate to the point that they simply accept the collateral cost of it. Is it so hard to accept the collateral costs of not restricting the 1st amendment as well?

What does the private ownership of guns have to do with Furgenson and the riots? The only thing I read was their were store owners protecting their stuff with the use of weapons. I guess what they should be doing is using a broom to shoo those rioters away.

Read closely, I am commenting on the vast difference in value conservatives have between the 1st amendment and the second. For gun ownership there can be no restrictions no matter who is getting shot, for mass protests cops need to get in there and put them down before some property gets hurt.

What you are saying isn't really true. A person, without permit, can't own a machine gun. So saying "no restrictions" is not really true. That said, I still do not see a connection between riot and gun ownership. And I am not a big supporter of every Tom, Dick and Harry carrying a gun everywhere they go. My brother does and I ask him why he feels the need, he said "because." Then he rationalized it by saying that for all his years he has not had a problem, which isn't exactly true to begin with. But I countered with that I being older, having traveled all over the country without a gun, and I have never had the need for a gun so I guess my way is the better way.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Just like in Iraq, the conservative approach is guns, threats, tear gas, swat teams, armored vehicles, automatic weapons.

Then, after the brutality failed, Democrats stepped in to calm the nerves and handle the situation.

We've seen it everywhere Republican policies are implemented.

Ferguson, Mo. is typical stupidity from the left. The so called victim was nothing more then a thug. Cop did his job and the idiots on the left praise the thug. IDIOTS!!!!

 

[Freewill]

Liberal gun control:

 

[deltex1]

Just like in Iraq, the conservative approach is guns, threats, tear gas, swat teams, armored vehicles, automatic weapons.

Then, after the brutality failed, Democrats stepped in to calm the nerves and hanxdle the situation.

We've seen it everywhere Republican policies are implemented.

I think it typifies the difference between your head and a large rock....none.

 

[kaz]

Ferguson, Missouri - typifies the difference between Conservatives and Liberals

That is does. Democrats are race pimps who don't care about the truth. They show that once again.

 

[Samson]

Aren't Ferguson and St. Louis County BOTH controlled by elected Democrats?

And Detroit, and Chicago.....the list goes on.

The mayor of Ferguson is a Republican

 

[Sallow]

Just like in Iraq, the conservative approach is guns, threats, tear gas, swat teams, armored vehicles, automatic weapons.

Then, after the brutality failed, Democrats stepped in to calm the nerves and handle the situation.

We've seen it everywhere Republican policies are implemented.

ya utah and idaho are gigantic failures aren't they.

try using your brain.

Utah and Idaho have industries that depend HEAVILY on government subsidies.