Free Officer Michael Slager

[The Professor]

Anyone who thinks that shooting was reasonable use of force is a nutjob. Scott was obviously not a threat.

Anyone who knows the law and is familiar with the facts of the case would have to agree with you. Hell, even officer Slager agrees with you! He entered a guilty plea and agreed to serve 20 years. That was a wise decision on his part. Slager's first trial resulted in a hung jury with 11 jurors voting for conviction and only one juror voting for acquittal. Apparently Slager knew he was lucky to find one nutjob who saved his butt and was afraid he could not find another one. Slager saw the handwriting on the wall and thought it best to cut his losses. His admission of guilt ends debate on the subject.

 

[protectionist]

We should ALL agree with Protectionist! Free Officer Michael Slager!

Otherwise the Hillsborough Sheriffs dept will have us arrested for disagreeing with a senior citizen!!

Disagreeing doesn't violate 825.102, as you know, Mr

Neither does calling you a "dumbass" on a political debate website.

A court would determine that. Their call, not yours.

A court? Do you realize how weak this makes you look? Do you realize that, despite your claims, you are one of the most limp-wristed liberals on these forums? You claim to be a conservative. But when someone calls you a fairly innocuous name, you resort to calling for the gov't to prosecute this person? And, in addition, you have called others worse names, for sure.

And no, I have no doubt that calling you a dumbass on a political debate website is certainly not abuse or aggravated assault on a senior citizen. The fact that you try to play this card is simply cowardice and pettiness on your part.

When a post is as much a mess as that, I usually don't dignify it with a response. I feel generous today

1. Calling for law enforcement is conservative, not liberal
2. Calling someone "dumbass" (& other names you called) are verbal abuse. 100%
3. I never said "aggravated assault", you said that
4. Last sentence of your messy post is more violation of FL St 825.102

 

[protectionist]

Glad Slager got his just desserts.

Now, if we want REAL justice for victims of police brutality, we need to remove qualified immunity protections from police officers.

So you're hook, line & sinker for the Obama/Sharpton/Jackson race hustle campaign too, huh ? OK...noted.

EARTH TO OSCAR: the police brutality ploys have repeatedly been invalidated in the courts (Wilson, Shelby, Baltimore 6, etc)

Yes. The cops usually go free. But we hope that is changing. We are perhaps naive or silly enough to believe that the thugs in uniform will be held accountable. A dream of ours. A nightmare of yours.

Suckers believe this.

 

[JakeStarkey]

protectionist go his ass hammered up between his ears and is kissing it as it is being hammered so that he can hear it being hammered.

 

[protectionist]

We should ALL agree with Protectionist! Free Officer Michael Slager!

Otherwise the Hillsborough Sheriffs dept will have us arrested for disagreeing with a senior citizen!!

Disagreeing doesn't violate 825.102, as you know, Mr

Neither does calling you a "dumbass" on a political debate website.

A court would determine that. Their call, not yours.

A court? Do you realize how weak this makes you look? Do you realize that, despite your claims, you are one of the most limp-wristed liberals on these forums? You claim to be a conservative. But when someone calls you a fairly innocuous name, you resort to calling for the gov't to prosecute this person? And, in addition, you have called others worse names, for sure.

And no, I have no doubt that calling you a dumbass on a political debate website is certainly not abuse or aggravated assault on a senior citizen. The fact that you try to play this card is simply cowardice and pettiness on your part.

Are you also a senior citizen?

He is not.

 

[protectionist]

A court would determine that. Their call, not yours.

A court would point its collective finger at you, laugh mightily, and yell

protectionist, your understanding of the law is merely pathetic.

Joke Starkey excels in hollow rhetoric.

 

[protectionist]

Anyone who thinks that shooting was reasonable use of force is a nutjob. Scott was obviously not a threat.

Anyone who knows the law and is familiar with the facts of the case would have to agree with you. Hell, even officer Slager agrees with you! He entered a guilty plea and agreed to serve 20 years. That was a wise decision on his part. Slager's first trial resulted in a hung jury with 11 jurors voting for conviction and only one juror voting for acquittal. Apparently Slager knew he was lucky to find one nutjob who saved his butt and was afraid he could not find another one. Slager saw the handwriting on the wall and thought it best to cut his losses. His admission of guilt ends debate on the subject.

Refuted earlier in the thread. Even in the OP. .

 

[protectionist]

protectionist go his ass hammered up between his ears and is kissing it as it is being hammered so that he can hear it being hammered.

Is there a doctor in the house ? I mean really. Pheeeew!

 

[JoeMoma]

A court would determine that. Their call, not yours.

A court would point its collective finger at you, laugh mightily, and yell

protectionist, your understanding of the law is merely pathetic.

Joke Starkey excels in hollow rhetoric.

The man in his avatar pic looks like one to me.

 

[JakeStarkey]

It's enjoyable teasing the Slagerturds.

 

[WinterBorn]

We should ALL agree with Protectionist! Free Officer Michael Slager!

Otherwise the Hillsborough Sheriffs dept will have us arrested for disagreeing with a senior citizen!!

Disagreeing doesn't violate 825.102, as you know, Mr

Neither does calling you a "dumbass" on a political debate website.

A court would determine that. Their call, not yours.

A court? Do you realize how weak this makes you look? Do you realize that, despite your claims, you are one of the most limp-wristed liberals on these forums? You claim to be a conservative. But when someone calls you a fairly innocuous name, you resort to calling for the gov't to prosecute this person? And, in addition, you have called others worse names, for sure.

And no, I have no doubt that calling you a dumbass on a political debate website is certainly not abuse or aggravated assault on a senior citizen. The fact that you try to play this card is simply cowardice and pettiness on your part.

When a post is as much a mess as that, I usually don't dignify it with a response. I feel generous today

1. Calling for law enforcement is conservative, not liberal
2. Calling someone "dumbass" (& other names you called) are verbal abuse. 100%
3. I never said "aggravated assault", you said that
4. Last sentence of your messy post is more violation of FL St 825.102

Calling for law enforcement because someone called you a dumbass on a political debate website is certainly NOT conservative. Wanting the gov't to protect you from name-calling is as leftwing as it gets. You are wanting USMB to be your "safe space".

Nothing I said is a violation of 825.102.

I have asked how being called a dumbass is a violation of 825.102, and you have avoided answering. You claim you have already answered, but I have not seen it.

 

[WinterBorn]

Disagreeing doesn't violate 825.102, as you know, Mr

Neither does calling you a "dumbass" on a political debate website.

A court would determine that. Their call, not yours.

A court? Do you realize how weak this makes you look? Do you realize that, despite your claims, you are one of the most limp-wristed liberals on these forums? You claim to be a conservative. But when someone calls you a fairly innocuous name, you resort to calling for the gov't to prosecute this person? And, in addition, you have called others worse names, for sure.

And no, I have no doubt that calling you a dumbass on a political debate website is certainly not abuse or aggravated assault on a senior citizen. The fact that you try to play this card is simply cowardice and pettiness on your part.

Are you also a senior citizen?

He is not.

Depends on who you ask. I am a member of AARP. I get senior discounts in most places. I'll be 58 in about 6 weeks. By most standards I am a senior citizen. I simply prefer not to use ridiculous euphemisms. I am old. Active, fit, happy, mentally sharp and still who I have always been. But I am beyond middle aged. So I am old.

 

[WinterBorn]

A court would determine that. Their call, not yours.

A court would point its collective finger at you, laugh mightily, and yell

protectionist, your understanding of the law is merely pathetic.

Joke Starkey excels in hollow rhetoric.

The man in his avatar pic looks like one to me.

The man in the avatar is me. The pic was taken over a year ago. Yep, I'm old.

 

[hjmick]

snow·flake
(snō′flāk′)
n.
1. A single flake or crystal of snow.
2. Any of several bulbous perennial plants of the genus Leucojum, native to Europe, having nodding white bell-shaped flowers.
3. A snow bunting.
4. Slang A person who is considered to be overly sensitive or too easily offended, especially as a result of believing himself or herself to be unique or special.
5. Protectionist

 

[SavannahMann]

Glad Slager got his just desserts.

Now, if we want REAL justice for victims of police brutality, we need to remove qualified immunity protections from police officers.

So you're hook, line & sinker for the Obama/Sharpton/Jackson race hustle campaign too, huh ? OK...noted.

EARTH TO OSCAR: the police brutality ploys have repeatedly been invalidated in the courts (Wilson, Shelby, Baltimore 6, etc)

Yes. The cops usually go free. But we hope that is changing. We are perhaps naive or silly enough to believe that the thugs in uniform will be held accountable. A dream of ours. A nightmare of yours.

Suckers believe this.

Then you agree that the police are not being held accountable, while you are arguing that a cop shouldn’t be held accountable. Why shouldn’t the cops be held accountable for their crimes? I mean, are we not a nation of laws, where no one is above the law, and no one is below the law, they are all equal before the law?

 

[WinterBorn]

I sent an email to the Hillsborough County Sheriifs office, asking if calling a senior citizen a "dumbass" on a political debate website is actually a violation of 825.102.

I don't expect an answer soon. But we will see how delusional Protectionist/SafeSpace really is.

 

[hjmick]

I sent an email to the Hillsborough County Sheriifs office, asking if calling a senior citizen a "dumbass" on a political debate website is actually a violation of 825.102.

I don't expect an answer soon. But we will see how delusional Protectionist/SafeSpace really is.

I would expect your email to appear on their Facebook page of humorous inquiries...

 

[protectionist]

Disagreeing doesn't violate 825.102, as you know, Mr

Neither does calling you a "dumbass" on a political debate website.

A court would determine that. Their call, not yours.

A court? Do you realize how weak this makes you look? Do you realize that, despite your claims, you are one of the most limp-wristed liberals on these forums? You claim to be a conservative. But when someone calls you a fairly innocuous name, you resort to calling for the gov't to prosecute this person? And, in addition, you have called others worse names, for sure.

And no, I have no doubt that calling you a dumbass on a political debate website is certainly not abuse or aggravated assault on a senior citizen. The fact that you try to play this card is simply cowardice and pettiness on your part.

When a post is as much a mess as that, I usually don't dignify it with a response. I feel generous today

1. Calling for law enforcement is conservative, not liberal
2. Calling someone "dumbass" (& other names you called) are verbal abuse. 100%
3. I never said "aggravated assault", you said that
4. Last sentence of your messy post is more violation of FL St 825.102

Calling for law enforcement because someone called you a dumbass on a political debate website is certainly NOT conservative. Wanting the gov't to protect you from name-calling is as leftwing as it gets. You are wanting USMB to be your "safe space".

Nothing I said is a violation of 825.102.

I have asked how being called a dumbass is a violation of 825.102, and you have avoided answering. You claim you have already answered, but I have not seen it.

You PRETEND you haven't.

 

[protectionist]

Glad Slager got his just desserts.

Now, if we want REAL justice for victims of police brutality, we need to remove qualified immunity protections from police officers.

So you're hook, line & sinker for the Obama/Sharpton/Jackson race hustle campaign too, huh ? OK...noted.

EARTH TO OSCAR: the police brutality ploys have repeatedly been invalidated in the courts (Wilson, Shelby, Baltimore 6, etc)

Yes. The cops usually go free. But we hope that is changing. We are perhaps naive or silly enough to believe that the thugs in uniform will be held accountable. A dream of ours. A nightmare of yours.

Suckers believe this.

Then you agree that the police are not being held accountable, while you are arguing that a cop shouldn’t be held accountable. Why shouldn’t the cops be held accountable for their crimes? I mean, are we not a nation of laws, where no one is above the law, and no one is below the law, they are all equal before the law?

Of course ALL people should be held accountable - but we've been hit by political BS. Some fall for the police brutality scam. Some don't.

I've already addressed this here.

 

[protectionist]

snow·flake
(snō′flāk′)
n.
1. A single flake or crystal of snow.
2. Any of several bulbous perennial plants of the genus Leucojum, native to Europe, having nodding white bell-shaped flowers.
3. A snow bunting.
4. Slang A person who is considered to be overly sensitive or too easily offended, especially as a result of believing himself or herself to be unique or special.
5. Protectionist

Tell that to dozens of people serving time in FL prisons for 825.102