Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
View attachment 261222We've got politicians forcing their way into people's vaginas, so is this any surprise?
The thread premise is a lie, it also fails as both a hasty generalization fallacy and slippery slope fallacy – nothing more than rightwing demagoguery and sophistry.In Baltimore, you don’t have to imagine.
Opinion | In Baltimore, Police Officers Are the Bad Guys With Guns
We spent the last two years reporting a book on the Baltimore Police Department’s Gun Trace Task Force, a once-celebrated police squad whose members were ultimately indicted on federal racketeering charges in 2017. We learned that a war on guns in Baltimore looks a lot like the war on drugs: It is a city waging war on its own citizens.
And it doesn’t work.
The war on guns, like the war on drugs, is primarily waged on poor people by small operations units that drive around in unmarked cars looking for trouble. They’re called jump-out boys or knockers, and they do not respond to citizen calls. Instead, they take away resources and credibility from the patrol officers who do. They do not solve homicides, and they often damage community trust, hampering the efforts of those who do solve homicides.
You can read the rest of the article, but let me put it this way. Guns are not the problem. Never have been. The problem is that the firearm is the scapegoat. But let’s focus on these get the guns off the street sweeps and police efforts.
Imagine you call the cops to report a robbery in progress, and they don’t show up. Imagine you call the cops to report an assault, and it takes hours before one shows up to write the report. The person who is robbing, and assaulting is never caught. So when the police show up wanting to know what you saw when a murder happened, what do you do? Do you put your neck on the line to identify someone, or not? If you live in that neighborhood you do not. The best the Baltimore police ever did on solving murders was 50%. Heads you get away with it, tails you get caught. Right now, the odds are about one in three. In other words, you are twice as likely to get away with the murder, as you are to get caught.
The illusion of “get tough” policing is that it is proactive and goes after the criminals. The reality is that it alienates the community, and it would alienate you too. Don’t pretend it doesn’t.
One of the reasons that Trump and his associates did not cooperate with the FBI was obvious. They knew the basis of the investigation was false. They knew that the Golden Shower file was a lie. So why help with someone who is obviously setting you up? The FBI became the enemy, by their own actions. The Department of Justice became the ones not to be trusted, by their own actions.
In those communities we are talking about the police are the enemy. They don’t get the murderers, they don’t get the robbers, they don’t get the people preying on the citizenry. They get the citizens, for trying to protect themselves the same way you and I do, by getting a gun. We’ve said it for years, the police will show up after the fact, and draw an outline around you. Otherwise, you’re on your own to defend yourself.
I can’t begrudge people doing what I believe is their God given Right.
Only a tiny percentage of officers were involved in illegal activities – activities neither sanctioned by the city nor authorized by statute; that a Baltimore police sergeant was subject to criminal prosecution is proof of that.
This thread is yet another example of how dishonest and reprehensible most conservatives are.
Your pic shows how stupid you are. You have to consider growiing up.
A government that can claim sovereignty over a person's body can damned well claim sovereignty over inanimate objects possessed by people, such as guns.
Maybe more than one.Don't be surprised when one gets shot.
In Baltimore, you don’t have to imagine.
Opinion | In Baltimore, Police Officers Are the Bad Guys With Guns
We spent the last two years reporting a book on the Baltimore Police Department’s Gun Trace Task Force, a once-celebrated police squad whose members were ultimately indicted on federal racketeering charges in 2017. We learned that a war on guns in Baltimore looks a lot like the war on drugs: It is a city waging war on its own citizens.
And it doesn’t work.
The war on guns, like the war on drugs, is primarily waged on poor people by small operations units that drive around in unmarked cars looking for trouble. They’re called jump-out boys or knockers, and they do not respond to citizen calls. Instead, they take away resources and credibility from the patrol officers who do. They do not solve homicides, and they often damage community trust, hampering the efforts of those who do solve homicides.
You can read the rest of the article, but let me put it this way. Guns are not the problem. Never have been. The problem is that the firearm is the scapegoat. But let’s focus on these get the guns off the street sweeps and police efforts.
Imagine you call the cops to report a robbery in progress, and they don’t show up. Imagine you call the cops to report an assault, and it takes hours before one shows up to write the report. The person who is robbing, and assaulting is never caught. So when the police show up wanting to know what you saw when a murder happened, what do you do? Do you put your neck on the line to identify someone, or not? If you live in that neighborhood you do not. The best the Baltimore police ever did on solving murders was 50%. Heads you get away with it, tails you get caught. Right now, the odds are about one in three. In other words, you are twice as likely to get away with the murder, as you are to get caught.
The illusion of “get tough” policing is that it is proactive and goes after the criminals. The reality is that it alienates the community, and it would alienate you too. Don’t pretend it doesn’t.
One of the reasons that Trump and his associates did not cooperate with the FBI was obvious. They knew the basis of the investigation was false. They knew that the Golden Shower file was a lie. So why help with someone who is obviously setting you up? The FBI became the enemy, by their own actions. The Department of Justice became the ones not to be trusted, by their own actions.
In those communities we are talking about the police are the enemy. They don’t get the murderers, they don’t get the robbers, they don’t get the people preying on the citizenry. They get the citizens, for trying to protect themselves the same way you and I do, by getting a gun. We’ve said it for years, the police will show up after the fact, and draw an outline around you. Otherwise, you’re on your own to defend yourself.
I can’t begrudge people doing what I believe is their God given Right.
They've been doing that to pot smokers for decades.
and conservatives laughed!
I'll make a deal with you: you vote to legalize pot and I'll vote for you to keep your guns.
only a minuscule percentage of legal gun owners will ever commit any crime never mind murder yet there is a call to curb the gun ownership rights of these law abiding peopleThe thread premise is a lie, it also fails as both a hasty generalization fallacy and slippery slope fallacy – nothing more than rightwing demagoguery and sophistry.In Baltimore, you don’t have to imagine.
Opinion | In Baltimore, Police Officers Are the Bad Guys With Guns
We spent the last two years reporting a book on the Baltimore Police Department’s Gun Trace Task Force, a once-celebrated police squad whose members were ultimately indicted on federal racketeering charges in 2017. We learned that a war on guns in Baltimore looks a lot like the war on drugs: It is a city waging war on its own citizens.
And it doesn’t work.
The war on guns, like the war on drugs, is primarily waged on poor people by small operations units that drive around in unmarked cars looking for trouble. They’re called jump-out boys or knockers, and they do not respond to citizen calls. Instead, they take away resources and credibility from the patrol officers who do. They do not solve homicides, and they often damage community trust, hampering the efforts of those who do solve homicides.
You can read the rest of the article, but let me put it this way. Guns are not the problem. Never have been. The problem is that the firearm is the scapegoat. But let’s focus on these get the guns off the street sweeps and police efforts.
Imagine you call the cops to report a robbery in progress, and they don’t show up. Imagine you call the cops to report an assault, and it takes hours before one shows up to write the report. The person who is robbing, and assaulting is never caught. So when the police show up wanting to know what you saw when a murder happened, what do you do? Do you put your neck on the line to identify someone, or not? If you live in that neighborhood you do not. The best the Baltimore police ever did on solving murders was 50%. Heads you get away with it, tails you get caught. Right now, the odds are about one in three. In other words, you are twice as likely to get away with the murder, as you are to get caught.
The illusion of “get tough” policing is that it is proactive and goes after the criminals. The reality is that it alienates the community, and it would alienate you too. Don’t pretend it doesn’t.
One of the reasons that Trump and his associates did not cooperate with the FBI was obvious. They knew the basis of the investigation was false. They knew that the Golden Shower file was a lie. So why help with someone who is obviously setting you up? The FBI became the enemy, by their own actions. The Department of Justice became the ones not to be trusted, by their own actions.
In those communities we are talking about the police are the enemy. They don’t get the murderers, they don’t get the robbers, they don’t get the people preying on the citizenry. They get the citizens, for trying to protect themselves the same way you and I do, by getting a gun. We’ve said it for years, the police will show up after the fact, and draw an outline around you. Otherwise, you’re on your own to defend yourself.
I can’t begrudge people doing what I believe is their God given Right.
Only a tiny percentage of officers were involved in illegal activities – activities neither sanctioned by the city nor authorized by statute; that a Baltimore police sergeant was subject to criminal prosecution is proof of that.
This thread is yet another example of how dishonest and reprehensible most conservatives are.
Does this filth ever post anything that doesn't have "fallacy", "premise", and other assorted bullshit words that he throws around like refuse?The thread premise is a lie, it also fails as both a hasty generalization fallacy and slippery slope fallacy – nothing more than rightwing demagoguery and sophistry.In Baltimore, you don’t have to imagine.
Opinion | In Baltimore, Police Officers Are the Bad Guys With Guns
We spent the last two years reporting a book on the Baltimore Police Department’s Gun Trace Task Force, a once-celebrated police squad whose members were ultimately indicted on federal racketeering charges in 2017. We learned that a war on guns in Baltimore looks a lot like the war on drugs: It is a city waging war on its own citizens.
And it doesn’t work.
The war on guns, like the war on drugs, is primarily waged on poor people by small operations units that drive around in unmarked cars looking for trouble. They’re called jump-out boys or knockers, and they do not respond to citizen calls. Instead, they take away resources and credibility from the patrol officers who do. They do not solve homicides, and they often damage community trust, hampering the efforts of those who do solve homicides.
You can read the rest of the article, but let me put it this way. Guns are not the problem. Never have been. The problem is that the firearm is the scapegoat. But let’s focus on these get the guns off the street sweeps and police efforts.
Imagine you call the cops to report a robbery in progress, and they don’t show up. Imagine you call the cops to report an assault, and it takes hours before one shows up to write the report. The person who is robbing, and assaulting is never caught. So when the police show up wanting to know what you saw when a murder happened, what do you do? Do you put your neck on the line to identify someone, or not? If you live in that neighborhood you do not. The best the Baltimore police ever did on solving murders was 50%. Heads you get away with it, tails you get caught. Right now, the odds are about one in three. In other words, you are twice as likely to get away with the murder, as you are to get caught.
The illusion of “get tough” policing is that it is proactive and goes after the criminals. The reality is that it alienates the community, and it would alienate you too. Don’t pretend it doesn’t.
One of the reasons that Trump and his associates did not cooperate with the FBI was obvious. They knew the basis of the investigation was false. They knew that the Golden Shower file was a lie. So why help with someone who is obviously setting you up? The FBI became the enemy, by their own actions. The Department of Justice became the ones not to be trusted, by their own actions.
In those communities we are talking about the police are the enemy. They don’t get the murderers, they don’t get the robbers, they don’t get the people preying on the citizenry. They get the citizens, for trying to protect themselves the same way you and I do, by getting a gun. We’ve said it for years, the police will show up after the fact, and draw an outline around you. Otherwise, you’re on your own to defend yourself.
I can’t begrudge people doing what I believe is their God given Right.
Only a tiny percentage of officers were involved in illegal activities – activities neither sanctioned by the city nor authorized by statute; that a Baltimore police sergeant was subject to criminal prosecution is proof of that.
This thread is yet another example of how dishonest and reprehensible most conservatives are.
So you think that Big Government seizing your body is funny. Figures.Your pic shows how stupid you are. You have to consider growiing up.
A government that can claim sovereignty over a person's body can damned well claim sovereignty over inanimate objects possessed by people, such as guns.
View attachment 261240
Hilarious. But the topic is unconstitutional gun seizures.So you think that Big Government seizing your body is funny. Figures.Your pic shows how stupid you are. You have to consider growiing up.
A government that can claim sovereignty over a person's body can damned well claim sovereignty over inanimate objects possessed by people, such as guns.
View attachment 261240
Read my post at No. 21. If the government can seize your body, it can seize anything else that you've got, your eye teeth or your guns or anything else that you have. You seem to be a Big Government person.Hilarious. But the topic is unconstitutional gun seizures.So you think that Big Government seizing your body is funny. Figures.Your pic shows how stupid you are. You have to consider growiing up.
A government that can claim sovereignty over a person's body can damned well claim sovereignty over inanimate objects possessed by people, such as guns.
View attachment 261240
How short of memory or lack of knowledge, people are.-
Many people agree that the confiscation of private-owned guns would be unpopular with many Americans, and would likely even lead to civil uprising. What many don't know is that the spark that started the American Revolution was the attempted confiscation of civilian-owned firearms and ammunition. There were many, many reasons why the Americans revolted against the British, but none of these grievances resulted in such an immediate, ferocious response by the Americans as the Crown's attempts at gun control.
After the Boston Tea Party, an extremely angry Parliament passed what was called The Intolerable (or Coercive) Acts, intended to punish the city of Boston for the acts of the Tea Partiers and enforced by the British military. The British governor of Massachusetts, General Thomas Gage, tried to disperse a town meeting in Salem but the troops he sent were forced to retreat when 3000 armed Americans responded. According to John Andres, Gage's aide, everyone in the area over 16 years of age owned and was experienced with a gun and owned plenty of gunpowder.
Realizing that it would be impossible to enforce the new laws on a well-armed populace with only 2000 troops in Boston. Gage decided to send men to Charlestown to capture the powderhouse - an important building where the members of a community would store their gunpowder to keep the volatile explosive away from their homes. The British seized hundreds of barrels of gunpowder, provoking over 20,000 militiamen from the surrounding areas to start marching toward Boston (but dispersed upon learning that there was no fighting in the city).
Soon after, General Gage began warrantless searches and seizures of firearms and ammunition throughout Boston. The Boston Gazette reported that of all of Gage's policies, "what most irritated the People" was "seizing their Arms and Ammunition." To reduce the supply of guns in America, on October 19, 1774, the British started an arms embargo of America that required British subjects to have a permit to export guns and ammo to America, while simply not issuing any such permits.
In December of 1774, New Hampshire militiamen pre-emptively captured Fort William and Mary, near Portsmouth, and all the arms stores in it, upon learning that the British had sent two warships to do the same.
As a result of the outrage over the arms embargo and other gun control measures, many Americans started to form militias that were independent of the British government.
Suddenly, it happened. On April 19, 1775, 700 British Redcoats under Major Pitcairn left the city of Boston with the objective of seizing stores of American weapons at Lexington and Concord. Paul Revere warned the militias of the approaching British troops, and 200 men, aged from 16 to 60, were gathered to meet the British at Lexington. The Americans were quickly beaten, and the British advanced to Concord where the they believed the local Patriots kept most of their arms (including 2 cannons).
But the Americans, knowing that the British were coming to confiscate their weapons, secretly hauled off their arms stores to safety. A group of militia managed to defeat some of the British force at Concord's North Bridge. Disappointed in what they didn't find, the British began to retreat back to Boston, and that's when the massacre really happened.
Hundreds of armed Americans started swarming in from nearby towns to help; they soon doubled the numbers of the British as the Redcoats were peppered with surprisingly accurate rifle and musket fire from opportunist snipers for the entirety of their retreat. The Americans were running out of ammo and powder by the time British reinforcements from Boston came to escort what was left of Major Pitcairn's troops.
That night, American militiamen began the siege of Boston. The War for Independence had started, and it started in response to gun control.
Simple Facts and Plain Arguments: The Revolutionary War Began With Gun Control
View attachment 261254How short of memory or lack of knowledge, people are.-
Many people agree that the confiscation of private-owned guns would be unpopular with many Americans, and would likely even lead to civil uprising. What many don't know is that the spark that started the American Revolution was the attempted confiscation of civilian-owned firearms and ammunition. There were many, many reasons why the Americans revolted against the British, but none of these grievances resulted in such an immediate, ferocious response by the Americans as the Crown's attempts at gun control.
After the Boston Tea Party, an extremely angry Parliament passed what was called The Intolerable (or Coercive) Acts, intended to punish the city of Boston for the acts of the Tea Partiers and enforced by the British military. The British governor of Massachusetts, General Thomas Gage, tried to disperse a town meeting in Salem but the troops he sent were forced to retreat when 3000 armed Americans responded. According to John Andres, Gage's aide, everyone in the area over 16 years of age owned and was experienced with a gun and owned plenty of gunpowder.
Realizing that it would be impossible to enforce the new laws on a well-armed populace with only 2000 troops in Boston. Gage decided to send men to Charlestown to capture the powderhouse - an important building where the members of a community would store their gunpowder to keep the volatile explosive away from their homes. The British seized hundreds of barrels of gunpowder, provoking over 20,000 militiamen from the surrounding areas to start marching toward Boston (but dispersed upon learning that there was no fighting in the city).
Soon after, General Gage began warrantless searches and seizures of firearms and ammunition throughout Boston. The Boston Gazette reported that of all of Gage's policies, "what most irritated the People" was "seizing their Arms and Ammunition." To reduce the supply of guns in America, on October 19, 1774, the British started an arms embargo of America that required British subjects to have a permit to export guns and ammo to America, while simply not issuing any such permits.
In December of 1774, New Hampshire militiamen pre-emptively captured Fort William and Mary, near Portsmouth, and all the arms stores in it, upon learning that the British had sent two warships to do the same.
As a result of the outrage over the arms embargo and other gun control measures, many Americans started to form militias that were independent of the British government.
Suddenly, it happened. On April 19, 1775, 700 British Redcoats under Major Pitcairn left the city of Boston with the objective of seizing stores of American weapons at Lexington and Concord. Paul Revere warned the militias of the approaching British troops, and 200 men, aged from 16 to 60, were gathered to meet the British at Lexington. The Americans were quickly beaten, and the British advanced to Concord where the they believed the local Patriots kept most of their arms (including 2 cannons).
But the Americans, knowing that the British were coming to confiscate their weapons, secretly hauled off their arms stores to safety. A group of militia managed to defeat some of the British force at Concord's North Bridge. Disappointed in what they didn't find, the British began to retreat back to Boston, and that's when the massacre really happened.
Hundreds of armed Americans started swarming in from nearby towns to help; they soon doubled the numbers of the British as the Redcoats were peppered with surprisingly accurate rifle and musket fire from opportunist snipers for the entirety of their retreat. The Americans were running out of ammo and powder by the time British reinforcements from Boston came to escort what was left of Major Pitcairn's troops.
That night, American militiamen began the siege of Boston. The War for Independence had started, and it started in response to gun control.
Simple Facts and Plain Arguments: The Revolutionary War Began With Gun Control
Across the nation... decades ago, police officers were admired citizens who the general population looked up to. In those days, the police were your protectors. Today, they are your possible persecutors.
Generally speaking my own attitudes towards cops has changed over the years. I still consider them as obviously a positive thing... but after getting my vehicle surrounded by three patrol cars - lights flashing, watching them talking about everything but me...all they while I am sitting there getting more and more pissed off. I get a $80 ticket for not having my seat belt on. WTF??
#2... at a stop sign on a road with light traffic, I approach the 4 way, no one there, I come close to a complete stop..but like 99% of all drivers, not quite. Here comes a cop...again I sit there for a good 20 minutes while he is doing what I have no idea...and the SOB gives me a ticket instead of a warning... WHY??
There was no one in sight, the road doesn't even have houses in that area. I am not talking the "rolling stop: where people merely slow down...I did like most people...almost a complete stop.
That is the problem. When you start harassing law abiding citizens who have zero arrest record, not even a speeding ticket in 30+ years of driving...and you surround their vehicle like a drug deal is going down, talk and chuckle with each other while the citizen sits there... and then give a f*cking ticket for a 1st offense to a 3 decade driver with no record.
I know. My history test meme was illustrating depotoo's point.View attachment 261254How short of memory or lack of knowledge, people are.-
Many people agree that the confiscation of private-owned guns would be unpopular with many Americans, and would likely even lead to civil uprising. What many don't know is that the spark that started the American Revolution was the attempted confiscation of civilian-owned firearms and ammunition. There were many, many reasons why the Americans revolted against the British, but none of these grievances resulted in such an immediate, ferocious response by the Americans as the Crown's attempts at gun control.
After the Boston Tea Party, an extremely angry Parliament passed what was called The Intolerable (or Coercive) Acts, intended to punish the city of Boston for the acts of the Tea Partiers and enforced by the British military. The British governor of Massachusetts, General Thomas Gage, tried to disperse a town meeting in Salem but the troops he sent were forced to retreat when 3000 armed Americans responded. According to John Andres, Gage's aide, everyone in the area over 16 years of age owned and was experienced with a gun and owned plenty of gunpowder.
Realizing that it would be impossible to enforce the new laws on a well-armed populace with only 2000 troops in Boston. Gage decided to send men to Charlestown to capture the powderhouse - an important building where the members of a community would store their gunpowder to keep the volatile explosive away from their homes. The British seized hundreds of barrels of gunpowder, provoking over 20,000 militiamen from the surrounding areas to start marching toward Boston (but dispersed upon learning that there was no fighting in the city).
Soon after, General Gage began warrantless searches and seizures of firearms and ammunition throughout Boston. The Boston Gazette reported that of all of Gage's policies, "what most irritated the People" was "seizing their Arms and Ammunition." To reduce the supply of guns in America, on October 19, 1774, the British started an arms embargo of America that required British subjects to have a permit to export guns and ammo to America, while simply not issuing any such permits.
In December of 1774, New Hampshire militiamen pre-emptively captured Fort William and Mary, near Portsmouth, and all the arms stores in it, upon learning that the British had sent two warships to do the same.
As a result of the outrage over the arms embargo and other gun control measures, many Americans started to form militias that were independent of the British government.
Suddenly, it happened. On April 19, 1775, 700 British Redcoats under Major Pitcairn left the city of Boston with the objective of seizing stores of American weapons at Lexington and Concord. Paul Revere warned the militias of the approaching British troops, and 200 men, aged from 16 to 60, were gathered to meet the British at Lexington. The Americans were quickly beaten, and the British advanced to Concord where the they believed the local Patriots kept most of their arms (including 2 cannons).
But the Americans, knowing that the British were coming to confiscate their weapons, secretly hauled off their arms stores to safety. A group of militia managed to defeat some of the British force at Concord's North Bridge. Disappointed in what they didn't find, the British began to retreat back to Boston, and that's when the massacre really happened.
Hundreds of armed Americans started swarming in from nearby towns to help; they soon doubled the numbers of the British as the Redcoats were peppered with surprisingly accurate rifle and musket fire from opportunist snipers for the entirety of their retreat. The Americans were running out of ammo and powder by the time British reinforcements from Boston came to escort what was left of Major Pitcairn's troops.
That night, American militiamen began the siege of Boston. The War for Independence had started, and it started in response to gun control.
Simple Facts and Plain Arguments: The Revolutionary War Began With Gun Control
Actually, he is not that wrong. It is far oversimplified. But is somewhat true. The orders to Colonel Smith were to seize any Military Supplies. That would be gunpowder and weapons, and arrest Sam Adams and John Hancock. Battles of Lexington and Concord - Wikipedia
So yeah. Weapons were a part of it. A big part.
In Baltimore, you don’t have to imagine.
Opinion | In Baltimore, Police Officers Are the Bad Guys With Guns
You can read the rest of the article, but let me put it this way. .
