• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Police Brutality Thread

TheLoveBandit said:
Constitution provides for safety and well being of the citizens. Enforcement of such curfews, when warranted, is not a violation. Not something anyone wants, but may be necessary at times. Did you feel the lockdown due to COVID was violating any rights?


.
Click to expand...
Are you really trying to defend the barring of the press from the scene? Yes curfews can be needed for public safety, of course. But they can't extend that to the press. What reason do the police have for that other than if they knew they would be do something that they don't want people to see?
 
alasdairm said:
not really. i'm not asking anybody to protect me. i'll live with - and accept responsibility for - the choice i've made to not own a gun.

i've been told, by multiple gun owners, that the primary, even sole, reason for owning a weapon is to fight government tyranny. gwb's torching of the 4th amendment wasn't enough so maybe the president's threat to deploy u.s. troops to the streets of america is enough? i'm trying to understand what level of tyranny is required before those people put their money where their mouth is.
Click to expand...

2nd amendment types love to talk about how close they are to civil war and taking back their rights. But it's all talk.

They won't do anything unless the government is literally right at their doorstep, and many won't even do anything then.

It's real easy to talk about putting your life on the line for your beliefs. Most however won't. They like their relatively comfortable life. And won't sacrifice it. They'll just bitch and talk about how close they are to doing something indefinitely.

The point at which people will actually do something is the point at which things are bad enough that they no longer have a comfortable life to sacrifice.

Personally, while I believe that people should have a right to own a gun. I think the whole "protecting against tyranny" rational is complete crap.

To me, the reason has always been that people with no history of violence, and especially women, have a right to defend themselves. And by extension have a right to possess a weapon for that purpose.

But protecting against tyranny? It's crap.

If there really were the need to fight against government tyranny. Not having legal guns won't stop people from doing it. And I don't believe the government is any less likely to go down that road because of an armed populace, because... Well.. They haven't!
 
Last edited:
alasdairm said:
not really. i'm not asking anybody to protect me. i'll live with - and accept responsibility for - the choice i've made to not own a gun.

i've been told, by multiple gun owners, that the primary, even sole, reason for owning a weapon is to fight government tyranny. gwb's torching of the 4th amendment wasn't enough so maybe the president's threat to deploy u.s. troops to the streets of america is enough? i'm trying to understand what level of tyranny is required before those people put their money where their mouth is.

or maybe, you know, there's another explanation and maybe that's the point...

alasdair
Click to expand...

No weapons at all? I mean, I am not an NRA nut or anything, and I am down for any measures to prevent another Sandy Hook, yet a pistol-grip 12 is a pretty handy tool to have. Really influential.
 
alasdairm said:
maybe the president's threat to deploy u.s. troops to the streets of america is enough? i'm trying to understand what level of tyranny is required
Click to expand...

You seem to see the President's assertion as infringing upon American's rights? The gun nuts see it as quelling the rioters, something the police are either ordered not to do, or are incapable of doing. I get the conflict of statement - gun nuts want to be able to riot and fight back against gov't if they feel their rights are being taken away, but I don't believe they see these riots as just and deserving of protection.

jackie jones said:
No weapons at all?
Click to expand...

FTR, I own none either.
 
What was the reasoning for such a beating? Not that it can be justified, but how did that begin?

Most of the footage I have seen has been a mutual smash, grab, and burn, with the citizens taking their aggression out on objects... or police.
 
TheLoveBandit said:
You seem to see the President's assertion as infringing upon American's rights? The gun nuts see it as quelling the rioters, something the police are either ordered not to do, or are incapable of doing. I get the conflict of statement - gun nuts want to be able to riot and fight back against gov't if they feel their rights are being taken away, but I don't believe they see these riots as just and deserving of protection.



FTR, I own none either.
Click to expand...

I have 12 guns, all rifles and shotguns. They are primarily for hunting deer, partridge, pheasant, and so fourth. I have 2 gun safes. One for guns, one for ammunition. I believe that at one time they will cease the availability of ammunition, so I have tens of thousands of rounds.

I respect the emotional security that you have and your peaceful projection, LB and Alasdair. Myself, I live in the woods. I have satellite internet. Guns are simply part of life. And respected. I do not use them as an extension of my penis.
 
Last edited:
People are often surprised to know I own a handgun and a rifle. I don't hunt (killing for fun just isn't my thing...), but I do enjoy target shooting. My guns are locked up in a safe also. I live in an open carry state, but feel absolutely no need to carry guns with the exception of going to or from the range. I hate how many people here need to tote their AR-15s everywhere they go.
 
JessFR said:
Thieves don't deserve death.
For fucks sake, that's what started this. A man died a over the suspicion that he may have used a counterfeit $20 bill.
Click to expand...
Id give the order to shoot looters and rioters to protect the innocent people that are being affected.
 
JessFR said:
Then we can have riots over the innocent people killed in the crossfire during the killing of people from the first riot.

Genius.
Click to expand...
Who says anyone innocent would be killed in crossfire?
u can’t just assume that.
curfew then give green light to shoot the scummy fuckers.
 
Soso78 said:
Who says anyone innocent would be killed in crossfire?
u can’t just assume that.
curfew then give green light to shoot the scummy fuckers.
Click to expand...

Of course I can assume it. There will inevitably be someone who has no choice but to be out after curfew. Or someone who isn't even aware of the curfew.

You can't just start indiscriminately gunning down anyone in sight of a large area and not expect innocent people to die.

And Jesus fucking christ is that suggestion fucked up.

This is why I so rarely post in here any more, it's why I don't even try to defend America to people anymore.

Because too many people are fucking horrible and think it's OK to just indiscriminately gun people down. It's fucking disgusting.

I'm out of here.
 
And wow, notifications must have stopped working I see tons of new posts in multiple different threads from the past day or so and didn't get any notifications. Weird.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top