Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Minimum moderation and heated debates.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby kiryan » Tue May 17, 2011 4:38 pm

If you don't listen to the clip you aren't entitled to comment.

Threatened with death by the police for legally and openly carrying a firearm.

I do think he needed to comply with the officer's commands instead of trying to argue with them and just sue them for their behavior after the fact to change the behavior.

Also, any minute now, I expect the left to rise up in support of this fellow for being profiled. He was assumed to be a criminal for carrying a gun.

http://www.foxbusiness.com/on-air/stoss ... rrying-gun
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Sarvis » Tue May 17, 2011 4:52 pm

We don't want to pay cops well enough to get smart cops.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Ragorn » Tue May 17, 2011 5:04 pm

I can't listen to audio at work, but I don't believe you'll find anyone on either side of the political spectrum who believes that police officers always act legally and with the best intent of the citizens foremost in their mind.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby kiryan » Tue May 17, 2011 5:19 pm

o'rly sarvis, do you know how much cops make? and then how much they make in overtime and benefits. Its quite lucrative actually.

I wouldn't call them overpaid because the tolerance for mistakes is 0 and really since they are authorized to use deadly force, I really think you need more than a candidate who just meets the mustard, you really need the best candidates. You are paid to basically deal with the low life in society and have to deal with all the stress without over reacting and going too far. Constantly being investigated by your own company. Personally, I'd rather scoop up shit with my hand in India than be a cop.

==

ragorn, true... however, just as a culture of racism in a police force would not be tolerated, the anti gun culture should cause the same level of alarm. This guy was profiled for doing nothing other than carrying a gun. For as hot you all get under the collar about the possibility of profiling due to immigration laws, theres no outrage or condemnation for actual profiling in ways you (as a group) support... the left doesn't think people should have guns let alone carry them.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Sarvis » Tue May 17, 2011 5:56 pm

kiryan wrote:o'rly sarvis, do you know how much cops make? and then how much they make in overtime and benefits. Its quite lucrative actually.


Are you kidding? They make less than lifeguards!


After graduating the academy as a Police Officer, you receive a pay increase to $42,813 ($1,640.34 bi-weekly). There are scheduled increases in pay to the present maximum of $55,603 a year (2,130.38 bi-weekly). - http://www.phillypolice.com/careers/sal ... -benefits/




I really think you need more than a candidate who just meets the mustard, you really need the best candidates.


But you just can't pay top dollar on government salary without pissing off Republicans.

You are paid to basically deal with the low life in society and have to deal with all the stress without over reacting and going too far. Constantly being investigated by your own company. Personally, I'd rather scoop up shit with my hand in India than be a cop.


Cops go to far and get away with it all the time, actually...

ragorn, true... however, just as a culture of racism in a police force would not be tolerated, the anti gun culture should cause the same level of alarm. This guy was profiled for doing nothing other than carrying a gun. For as hot you all get under the collar about the possibility of profiling due to immigration laws, theres no outrage or condemnation for actual profiling in ways you (as a group) support... the left doesn't think people should have guns let alone carry them.


You can't choose to be white. You can choose not to carry a gun on your hip.

Or do you STILL not understand what discrimination is actually about?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby kiryan » Tue May 17, 2011 6:14 pm

You do understand that the right to carry a gun is legally protected by the constitution and the supreme court and that this was a citizen being harassed for doing nothing other than execising his inalienable rights. How is that fundamentally different just because you have a choice to carry a gun?

and yes I understand what discrimination is about. Its a democrat weapon to manufacture outrage. Real discrimination is ignored if its not perpetrated against a democrat ally or cause.


==

If you actually knew any cops, you'd know what they actually make. I guarantee you, cops aren't making 55k a year (some are I'm sure, but this would be on the low end of what they make). You really do not understand how these unions and public sector employment rules work to inflate pay. And again, benefits are amazing.

and the average life guard is not making more than the average cop. The OC lifeguards are making more than probably 95% of Americans, cops included, which is a problem.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Sarvis » Tue May 17, 2011 6:46 pm

*pat Kiryan*

When you post some numbers to back up your claims we can talk.

By the way: Given that this guy had a tape recorder ready to record everything, he KNEW carrying the gun was going to cause a problem and was looking for trouble.

So if you want to compare that to the Rodney King beating then no, no you do not know anything about discrimination.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby kiryan » Tue May 17, 2011 7:11 pm

Uh huh. ignorance is bliss. continue to believe that police officers make 45k a year and a maximum of 55k. fuking idiot.

The rodney king beating was inexcusable and horrible.

Does anyone remember or even care what happened before the police beat him inexcusably? Does anyone remember the first part of the rodney king beating tape... the blurry scene that shows Rodney CHARGING police officers in an aggressive manner? Does anyone remember that Rodney King had just lead officers on a high speed chase and was drunk/high and not complying with officers orders? He broke multiple laws, acted aggressively towards officers, had several taser shots put into him (and fail to incapacitate him he was so high) but Rodney king is about racism.

You know what it is about racism, its about african american racism in their response to the trial where they rioted for a couple days and pulled a white truck driver out of his truck and beat him just as mercislessly for no reason other than he was there and white.

Nope, all we remember is it was racist white on black. IIRC, the court acquitted them of racist motivations and acquitted them of wrong doing as well. Its funny how these facts don't matter to you. Technically a while later, 2 cops were convicted of assaulting Rodney King pretty much because they got caught lieing about portions of the events that occured immediately after the beating.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Ragorn » Tue May 17, 2011 7:18 pm

kiryan wrote:o'rly sarvis, do you know how much cops make? and then how much they make in overtime and benefits. Its quite lucrative actually.

I have added police officers to your list of overpaid civil servants. My brother applied to the academy here six months ago, starting pay was $31,000 (and I'm in an extremely rich county). I made about that doing customer service work three weeks out of college.

ragorn, true... however, just as a culture of racism in a police force would not be tolerated, the anti gun culture should cause the same level of alarm. This guy was profiled for doing nothing other than carrying a gun. For as hot you all get under the collar about the possibility of profiling due to immigration laws, theres no outrage or condemnation for actual profiling in ways you (as a group) support... the left doesn't think people should have guns let alone carry them.

That's correct, I don't believe you should have guns, let alone carry them. But the law says you can, so until the law changes, it's the responsibility of the police to ensure that your freedom is upheld. I'm not sure if you realize it, but I'm siding with you on this.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Sarvis » Tue May 17, 2011 7:25 pm

kiryan wrote:Uh huh. ignorance is bliss. continue to believe that police officers make 45k a year and a maximum of 55k. fuking idiot.


Post the numbers. All I'm asking you to do is provide evidence backing up the claims you are making. You're not doing so, however. Can't possibly imagine why. :roll:

The rodney king beating was inexcusable and horrible.


Funny how you start that, then spend a paragraph basically justifying the cops actions.

This Philadelphia guy? If he'd been black he probably would have been shot for not instantly dropping to his knees.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby kiryan » Tue May 17, 2011 7:43 pm

The problem with proving it to you is that its much like what I suspect we will find with the lifeguard issue. Their salary is listed as X per year, but when you look at what each one actually takes home due to the overtime, shift differentials, and god knows what else, their actual take home is 1.5-2x their base. I believe its entirely possible that a police officer's salary in some town somewhere is max 55k a year, I almost guarnatee you that there are mechanisms that allow him to take home 50% more than that in reality. Without getting the financial report and taking the department compensation and dividing it by the # of users its hard to get an accurate portrayal of what they make in terms of direct paid compensation... let alone total compensation. and its designed that way to disguise their actual pay. Like teachers who get out and complain about making 40k a year (not mentioning that they get a 3 month vacation and draw unemployment for 3 months a year and pay nothing for healthcare).

Also, Its funny how you fail to address the real racism exposed in the rodney king incident and your false attempt to use it as an example of white on black racism.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Sarvis » Tue May 17, 2011 7:47 pm

kiryan wrote:and god knows what else


Certainly you don't.

, their actual take home is 1.5-2x their base.


Even if that's true we're talking 80-100, which is still less than the OC lifeguards you bitch about.

Also, Its funny how you fail to address the real racism exposed in the rodney king incident and your false attempt to use it as an example of white on black racism.


It's funny how you compare carrying a weapon around to your skin being a specific color. It's just as legal to be black as it is to carry a gun, after all. But one you can control.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby kiryan » Tue May 17, 2011 11:38 pm

I'm comparing being discriminated against with being discriminated against. Its funny how you can't see discrimination unless their skin color is black.

what the hell are you talking about with this pay thing. I'm not complaining about cop pay. I think in general they have police officer pay about right (total compensation) of course I don't quite know what hte pensions look like in general so perhaps theres still room for outrage... but I'm not outraged over it... unlike the OC lifeguards who are making SIGNIFICANTLY to OUTRAGEOUSLY more... even if they are required to be "police officers" + additional certifications.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Sarvis » Wed May 18, 2011 1:17 am

It's not discrimination, Kiryan.

Discrimination: "treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit"

This guy does not belong to a group, class or category that caused him to get in trouble. He was a guy who ran into an idiot cop.

Which brings us to the pay thing: Cops, as a rule, aren't grade A students. People who get good grades and enjoy reading/memorizing laws become lawyers and make a lot, LOT more than cops do. Cops are the guys who like to bully people and have power.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Wed May 18, 2011 5:32 am

Just a little bigoted.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby kiryan » Wed May 18, 2011 4:21 pm

Sarvis wrote:It's not discrimination, Kiryan.

Discrimination: "treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit"

This guy does not belong to a group, class or category that caused him to get in trouble. He was a guy who ran into an idiot cop.


He's a gun owner. Gun owners have a history of being targetted by liberals... and there are entire citiy police departments and administraitons that are known to be very anti gun.

Sarvis wrote:Which brings us to the pay thing: Cops, as a rule, aren't grade A students. People who get good grades and enjoy reading/memorizing laws become lawyers and make a lot, LOT more than cops do. Cops are the guys who like to bully people and have power.


You need to watch less TV and actually know some cops. You realize RENO911 is for entertainment right? Sure there are bad ones, bad departments, bad cities... but all the ones I've ever known (except 1) have been extremely mature disciplined individuals. Misguided in some cases, but not bullies.

and I'm predisposed to hate cops.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Sarvis » Wed May 18, 2011 5:16 pm

kiryan wrote:He's a gun owner. Gun owners have a history of being targetted by liberals... and there are entire citiy police departments and administraitons that are known to be very anti gun.


He wasn't targeted because he was a gun owner. He was targeted because he was openly carrying a gun and this cop did not know the law.


You need to watch less TV and actually know some cops. You realize RENO911 is for entertainment right? Sure there are bad ones, bad departments, bad cities... but all the ones I've ever known (except 1) have been extremely mature disciplined individuals. Misguided in some cases, but not bullies.

and I'm predisposed to hate cops.


Assume for the second that you are correct. In THIS case, do you think the cop is one of the ones you were talking about?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby kiryan » Wed May 18, 2011 5:38 pm

ok whatever sarvis. the cop didn't discriminate against gun owners, he was just trying to enforce the law.

man walking down the street with a handgun on his hip... im sure just ambling along and that warrants a "Yo, Junior, what are you doing?" No bias displayed there, none whatsoever... and the officer finds himself looking down the barrel of his gun at a calm person who knows what the laws are what kind of a response does it elicit? Clearly this dangerous law breaker who was out looking for trouble by walking to autozone needed to be held at gun point and forced into submission and threatened with death despite having acted completely calmly.

face it sarvis, if this guy was black, ACLU and NAACP would be all over it. It would be racism. but its a white guy with a gun, no discrimination in sight.

==

Oh.. and you seem to have trouble understanding when we are talkign about specific situations and general situations. You generalized cops as brutal bullies, I responded with a defense of cops in general. Now you're wondering why I'm saying all cops are good guys? You seem to have trouble understanding the context of a discussion. You did the same thing wtih life guards. the OC lifeguards are paid way too much, but yet you seem to think that I'm saying pool life guards making $10 an hour are paid too much. Maybe you need to take a reading class and figure out what context is.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Sarvis » Wed May 18, 2011 5:58 pm

kiryan wrote:ok whatever sarvis. the cop didn't discriminate against gun owners, he was just trying to enforce the law.


What he thought was the law, yes.

man walking down the street with X on his hip... im sure just ambling along and that warrants a "Yo, Junior, what are you doing?"


Let's try it with different things:
A joint
Open Smirnoff Bottle (containing water)
unsheathed Katana

Is it unreasonable to expect a cop to stop someone walking down the street with those things? It's illegal to smoke pot, carrying liquor is illegal in many places, and I believe carrying a sword around is illegal in many places too. (It can be carried sheathed, but not "brandished.")

The cop did not know it was legal to openly carry a gun. That is all that happened here.

who was out looking for trouble


Yes, he was. That's why he had the whole thing recorded. He saw a cop walking, and turned on the recorder to catch the exchange because he KNEW the cops were ignorant of the law and he'd be stopped.

needed to be held at gun point and forced into submission and threatened with death despite having acted completely calmly.


Acting calmly while holding a deadly weapon. The cop was wrong, but I think it's understandable he may have been nervous. Cops deal with armed criminals differently than unarmed criminals. For instance: You should be careful about where you reach in your car during a traffic stop. If a cop thinks you're reaching under your seat for a gun, he might pull his own to protect his own life.

face it sarvis, if this guy was black, ACLU and NAACP would be all over it. It would be racism. but its a white guy with a gun, no discrimination in sight.


If this guy was black he wouldn't have needed to carry a gun to get stopped by the police. There is no discrimination here.

The only thing here is that the cop did not know the law.

Oh.. and you seem to have trouble understanding when we are talkign about specific situations and general situations. You generalized cops as brutal bullies, I responded with a defense of cops in general. Now you're wondering why I'm saying all cops are good guys? You seem to have trouble understanding the context of a discussion. You did the same thing wtih life guards. the OC lifeguards are paid way too much, but yet you seem to think that I'm saying pool life guards making $10 an hour are paid too much. Maybe you need to take a reading class and figure out what context is.


Considering you think an isolated incident is a sign of discrimination, maybe you should follow your own advice?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
torkur
Sojourner
Posts: 293
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Orlando, FL, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby torkur » Thu May 19, 2011 4:08 am

The cop is clearly overreacting if you listen to it.


That said, the ironic part will come in 6 months when this same gun owner's wife and kids are sitting in a park 50 feet from this same cop. A man will walk past the cop carrying a gun and the cop will be so scared from the fallout of this to even look at him and just quickly ask if he has a permit. The man will walk up and open fire, killing the wife and kids. Then this same man and all the right wing morons that created these laws will complain about how useless the cops in their city are because they didn't think about the consequences, like always.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby kiryan » Thu May 19, 2011 6:25 pm

torkur you made my point exactly. Its discrimiating or profiling gun owners. We can't profile hispanics despite large percentages being illegal or arabs who are by far and large responsible for terrorism, but we can profile people carrying guns, that just makes sense.

and i'm the hipocrite.

--

sarvis a holstered gun is not holding a deadly weapon. its not threatening and the suspect was clearly CALM despite having a gun pointed at him.

and the officer certainly didn't need to have it pointed at the man and threaten to kill him if he even moved. you and the officer are out of line.

if the officer was pointing a gun at a black man, it would be national news and Obama would probably have to give a speech.
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Thu May 19, 2011 6:42 pm

I do have to say that the 'overreaction' in terms of shouting, cussing, and generally disrespecting the citizen is probably an effective tool cops in that area have when it comes to controlling suspects and preventing violence.

I wouldn't begrudge them so long as their department policy allows for that type of behavior. Cops, after all, are supposed to be the outward expression of violence and force in peacetime communities. Their job IS to compel people to do things, after all.

If you don't want it to happen to you, stop voting for stricter laws for them to enforce.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Sarvis » Thu May 19, 2011 7:30 pm

kiryan wrote:torkur you made my point exactly. Its discrimiating or profiling gun owners.


No, it isn't. It was someone CARRYING a gun OPENLY. They aren't going door to door on everyone who has a registered gun permit. They aren't pulling someone over because they randomly ran his plate and saw he owned a gun. He got stopped because he was OPENLY CARRYING a gun, and this cop did not know the law.

We can't profile hispanics


You can't put your brown-ness in your pocket to hide it from the cops. See the difference?


arabs who are by far and large responsible for terrorism,


Funny how no one ever says you should profile the Irish.

but we can profile people carrying guns, that just makes sense.


Because it isn't profiling.

And it doesn't make sense. The cop DID NOT KNOW THE LAW.

No one is saying this guy should have gotten stopped. We ARE saying that it was not profiling/discrimination, it was ignorance.

Look, to show profiling or discrimination you have to show that it is systemic. Black people are in jail at a much higher rate for crimes like pot possession, for instance. You COULD decide that more black people smoke pot, but if you actually go to college you and aren't a complete loner you'll realize that pretty much EVERYONE smokes pot. So that makes it evidence of discrimination.

For gun owners to show signs of being profiled, they'd have to face higher rates of "charges" (speeding tickets, pot arrests, jaywalking tickets, etc) than non-gun owners.

You are showing ONE GUY who got harassed by ONE COP who didn't understand the law, and generalizing that to all gun owners somehow.

It's fucking retarded.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby kiryan » Thu May 19, 2011 7:48 pm

lets say an arab youth is wearing a religious ceremonial knife on his hip and gets called a name and told to turn around to face a police officer pointing a gun at him... because the cop didn't know that carrying a ceremonial knife wasn't a crime.

your position is that the left would find this to be proper police behavior? bullshit. they'd be out in the streets decrying profiling, not chalking it up to an officer's mistake.
Kindi
Sojourner
Posts: 405
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 12:42 am

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Kindi » Thu May 19, 2011 8:36 pm

if someone wrote down the definition of the words "discrimination" and "profiling" and everyone agreed to use those definitions this entire argument would dissolve

right now it's just a crapton of equivocation
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Sarvis » Thu May 19, 2011 8:48 pm

kiryan wrote:your position is that the left would find this to be proper police behavior?



No. No no no fucking NO. No one anywhere, ever said that this was correct police behavior. It was a cop not knowing the law and going over the line.

We said it was not discrimination.

You're trying to point out that we'd call it discrimination if it happened to an Arab. You are probably right about that. But because he's Arab, not because he owns a knife. Because the same cop who'd stop an Arab with a knife probably wouldn't stop a white guy with a knife.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Sarvis » Thu May 19, 2011 8:48 pm

Kindi wrote:if someone wrote down the definition of the words "discrimination" and "profiling" and everyone agreed to use those definitions this entire argument would dissolve

right now it's just a crapton of equivocation


I actually did post the definition of Discrimination. Didn't help.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby kiryan » Thu May 19, 2011 10:14 pm

It is unjustified profiling, which you guys have defined as discrimination and racism and prejudicism and everything other kind of ism.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Sarvis » Thu May 19, 2011 10:49 pm

kiryan wrote:It is unjustified profiling, which you guys have defined as discrimination and racism and prejudicism and everything other kind of ism.



No, it was a cop not knowing it was legal to openly carry a gun .
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
torkur
Sojourner
Posts: 293
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Orlando, FL, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby torkur » Fri May 20, 2011 1:20 am

kiryan wrote:torkur you made my point exactly. Its discrimiating or profiling gun owners. We can't profile hispanics despite large percentages being illegal or arabs who are by far and large responsible for terrorism, but we can profile people carrying guns, that just makes sense.

and i'm the hipocrite.



Actually, it's not discriminating, it's reacting to the environment you're presented with. The difference between a murderer and "lawful open carry" standing next to you is the 2 seconds it takes to unholster and open fire because you can't tell the difference between the two to discriminate...you have NO idea whether they're a "gun owner" or just in posession of a gun.

I'll be happy to take your family for an outing in the park with a gun to prove the point. If you have _ANY_ uneasy feelings about me being right next to your kids and possibly openning fire....maybe doing it because someone cut me off on the drive over there so I'm in a bad mood.....maybe just having a bad day in general.... then you prove my point because I'm not a gun owner....but you have no right to ask me for papers proving this point one way or another because you're not a cop.

If you really don't have any problem with this, then you have MUCH bigger problems as a bad parent to deal with before this issue. :)
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Fri May 20, 2011 3:25 am

torkur wrote:The difference between a murderer and "lawful open carry" standing next to you is the 2 seconds it takes to unholster and open fire

Fewer than 1% of 1% of firearms are used in homicides. The vast majority of which are wielded by gang bangers and individuals with a violent criminal history.

Nice try though.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
torkur
Sojourner
Posts: 293
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Orlando, FL, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby torkur » Fri May 20, 2011 3:48 am

Teflor Lyorian wrote:
torkur wrote:The difference between a murderer and "lawful open carry" standing next to you is the 2 seconds it takes to unholster and open fire

Fewer than 1% of 1% of firearms are used in homicides. The vast majority of which are wielded by gang bangers and individuals with a violent criminal history.

Nice try though.


And? You still can't tell the difference to "discriminate" against one or the other in the same environment and situation.

Nice try though.
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Fri May 20, 2011 3:26 pm

torkur wrote:
Teflor Lyorian wrote:
torkur wrote:The difference between a murderer and "lawful open carry" standing next to you is the 2 seconds it takes to unholster and open fire

Fewer than 1% of 1% of firearms are used in homicides. The vast majority of which are wielded by gang bangers and individuals with a violent criminal history.

Nice try though.


And? You still can't tell the difference to "discriminate" against one or the other in the same environment and situation.

Nice try though.

No, douchebag, I was replying only to your bullshit in the quote.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby kiryan » Fri May 20, 2011 4:15 pm

torkur wrote:
kiryan wrote:torkur you made my point exactly. Its discrimiating or profiling gun owners. We can't profile hispanics despite large percentages being illegal or arabs who are by far and large responsible for terrorism, but we can profile people carrying guns, that just makes sense.

and i'm the hipocrite.



Actually, it's not discriminating, it's reacting to the environment you're presented with. The difference between a murderer and "lawful open carry" standing next to you is the 2 seconds it takes to unholster and open fire because you can't tell the difference between the two to discriminate...you have NO idea whether they're a "gun owner" or just in posession of a gun.

I'll be happy to take your family for an outing in the park with a gun to prove the point. If you have _ANY_ uneasy feelings about me being right next to your kids and possibly openning fire....maybe doing it because someone cut me off on the drive over there so I'm in a bad mood.....maybe just having a bad day in general.... then you prove my point because I'm not a gun owner....but you have no right to ask me for papers proving this point one way or another because you're not a cop.

If you really don't have any problem with this, then you have MUCH bigger problems as a bad parent to deal with before this issue. :)


you have NO idea whether they're a "gun owner" or just in posession of a gun.

== you have NO idea whether they're a lawful immigrant or just an illegal here to take american jobs and sell drugs.

I'll be happy to take your family for an outing in the park with a gun to prove the point. If you have _ANY_ uneasy feelings about me being right next to your kids and possibly openning fire....maybe doing it because someone cut me off on the drive over there so I'm in a bad mood.....maybe just having a bad day in general.... then you prove my point because I'm not a gun owner....but you have no right to ask me for papers proving this point one way or another because you're not a cop.

== blah blah blah, mexican or arab or someone driving a car without a license, blah blah blah.... then you prove my point.

== why is it illegal and discriminatory and profiling to ask someone to show their immigration papers if they can't speak english, but its ok and "good parenting" to suspect all gun owners of being law breakers. If profiling is discrimination as has been well established by the ACLU and the courts, then this is discrimination and you guys are hipocrites justifying your discrimination on the same flimsy reasons conservatives justify their discrimination... its a danger.
torkur
Sojourner
Posts: 293
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Orlando, FL, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby torkur » Sat May 21, 2011 2:54 am

Teflor Lyorian wrote:
torkur wrote:
Teflor Lyorian wrote:
torkur wrote:The difference between a murderer and "lawful open carry" standing next to you is the 2 seconds it takes to unholster and open fire

Fewer than 1% of 1% of firearms are used in homicides. The vast majority of which are wielded by gang bangers and individuals with a violent criminal history.

Nice try though.


And? You still can't tell the difference to "discriminate" against one or the other in the same environment and situation.

Nice try though.

No, douchebag, I was replying only to your bullshit in the quote.


1% of 1% of 1% of airplane flights are hijacked by terrorists. A Republican President and Republican Congress created a Government Agency with a huge budget called the TSA to stop this threat because it was too great......so, dipshit, if your own party considers something 1/100th the frequency to be too great a threat how is this an unreasonable concern?
torkur
Sojourner
Posts: 293
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Orlando, FL, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby torkur » Sat May 21, 2011 3:06 am

kiryan wrote:
you have NO idea whether they're a "gun owner" or just in posession of a gun.

== you have NO idea whether they're a lawful immigrant or just an illegal here to take american jobs and sell drugs.

I'll be happy to take your family for an outing in the park with a gun to prove the point. If you have _ANY_ uneasy feelings about me being right next to your kids and possibly openning fire....maybe doing it because someone cut me off on the drive over there so I'm in a bad mood.....maybe just having a bad day in general.... then you prove my point because I'm not a gun owner....but you have no right to ask me for papers proving this point one way or another because you're not a cop.

== blah blah blah, mexican or arab or someone driving a car without a license, blah blah blah.... then you prove my point.

== why is it illegal and discriminatory and profiling to ask someone to show their immigration papers if they can't speak english, but its ok and "good parenting" to suspect all gun owners of being law breakers. If profiling is discrimination as has been well established by the ACLU and the courts, then this is discrimination and you guys are hipocrites justifying your discrimination on the same flimsy reasons conservatives justify their discrimination... its a danger.


Discrimination:
1) ALL Latinos are illegals, can't speak English and are stealing our jobs.
2) You're too stupid to understand the difference because you're asian.


NOT Discrimination:
1) All drunk people driving a car are dangerous. According to you, we're discriminating against alcohol drinkers.
2) All texting on a cellphone while driving a car is dangerous. According to you, we're discriminating against cellphone users.
3) All people that break into your house wearing a ski mask and carrying a baseball bat are dangerous. According to you, we're discriminating against skiers and baseball players.
4) All Republicans that decide this is 1870, the Wild West, and need to act out their jerk off fantasies by carrying a gun to pretend to be cool are dangerous. According to you, we're discriminating against people who use a gun for defense, in their home, without bringing it into a crowd of people.
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Sun May 22, 2011 3:06 am

torkur wrote:
Teflor Lyorian wrote:
torkur wrote:
Teflor Lyorian wrote:
torkur wrote:The difference between a murderer and "lawful open carry" standing next to you is the 2 seconds it takes to unholster and open fire

Fewer than 1% of 1% of firearms are used in homicides. The vast majority of which are wielded by gang bangers and individuals with a violent criminal history.

Nice try though.


And? You still can't tell the difference to "discriminate" against one or the other in the same environment and situation.

Nice try though.

No, douchebag, I was replying only to your bullshit in the quote.


1% of 1% of 1% of airplane flights are hijacked by terrorists. A Republican President and Republican Congress created a Government Agency with a huge budget called the TSA to stop this threat because it was too great......so, dipshit, if your own party considers something 1/100th the frequency to be too great a threat how is this an unreasonable concern?

Wow. You are officially too stupid. You're going to try to call me a dipshit due to an act of the Federal government - something I and all other libertarians do our best to limit and restrict.

What comes out of your moron-hole is truly amazing. I wonder if there is a king of the dipshits, because you would clearly be a member of the royal family.


But just in case you're just BEING totally fucking stupid, and aren't ALWAYS fucking stupid, I'll explain to you what I think you seem to be asking:
First: you tried to say the only difference between lawful carry and murder is 2 seconds. To this, I responded that 1% of 1% of firearms are used in a homicide, indicating that there is a much greater difference between lawful carry and murder.
Second: you tried to drag me into your argument about figuring out whether a situation is lawful carry or murder, somewhere I was not originally and did not put myself into. I called you a douchebag and told you I was only responding to what I quoted from what you said.
Third: you tried to say that the risk of hijacking is lower than firearm homicide then tried to bullshit-paint my thought process as being the same as my party, asking how something 1% as likely could still be a reasonable concern (which, again, has absolutely NOTHING to do with my response to your bullshit, it's not even related). I decided you were being too stupid when you posted that, so I left a two-part message to see if you're actually literate. The big question being: CAN YOU READ? I doubt it, but other people are reading this thread too, maybe they'll get some entertainment.

Major Issues With Your "Argument" (it doesn't really qualify, but I am able to see what you're getting at):
1) 2 seconds from legal carry to murder != unreasonable concern (!= means 'does not equal')
Right off the bat, your comparison is stupid because you've changed your language in a significant and fundamental way. You're bending over backwards and pressing your face against your ass.
2) The TSA and DHS budgets are bipartisan - they are reissued yearly, first suggested by the president, then passed by the congress. Most recently, a Democrat president and for the last four years, a Democrat congress have funded the TSA. Next year will be a Democrat president and a Republican congress that will still fund the TSA. The partisan or "your party" part of your argument is - wait for it - bullshit.

Finally, an answer to your question (Why are plane hijackings a threat [to politicians] and gun homicides not a threat? [NOTE: this is what you are asking. I have made no indication that either are or are not a threat. The only argument I have posed is that there is a far greater difference between legal carry and murder than you have bullshitted.]):
The answer to this is simple: politics. If 9,000 gangsters get shot in the various 'hoods in the United States, no one at a high level is going to get voted out of office. If it were 1/100,000 as likely, there wouldn't be a TSA (like it was in the pre-9/11 days). If one plane is hijacked and flown into a major public building, power facility, chemical storage facility, what have you, politically, heads will roll. That's why. A deeper answer can be found in basic risk management. You consider the risk as the likelihood of an occurrence multiplied by the potential damage. The potential political damage of a hijacked plane attack MAKES it far more significant (again: politically) than a gangster getting shot, even though it is far less likely. Remember, you were asking about why Federal government created the TSA. That is why. Politics.

Now, is there anything else you'd like to learn about? I will be happy to teach you assuming you can actually learn.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
torkur
Sojourner
Posts: 293
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Orlando, FL, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby torkur » Sun May 22, 2011 6:05 am

Aw, the little monkey's mad. And the little monkey didn't read the whole quote. Guess you haven't learned to sound out that many words before getting tired?

Actual Quote: "The difference between a murderer and "lawful open carry" standing next to you is the 2 seconds it takes to unholster and open fire because you can't tell the difference between the two to discriminate...you have NO idea whether they're a "gun owner" or just in posession of a gun."

You CAN'T tell the difference between the two. I say nothing about 100% of carrying people being murderers. It's not common in most neighborhoods for someone to be carrying a gun legally, so from a reasonable person's perspective it's still 50/50 or worse in every situation you're in danger. Even if it's 98% being lawful in the real world, that's still an unreasonable threat to my "Life, Liberty, and Property" because it lowers my reaction time if something DOES happen which is what a Libertarian is concerned about (http://www.lp.org/platform). If you want to play the odds that you'll blindly be fine, ok. As I also stated, hijacking a plane is much less common, but for the people who died on 9/11/2001, I'm thinking they would have been happier if we were more concerned with those long-shot odds.

Guess you forgot to find out what the Libertarian party was about before you adopted the title?
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Mon May 23, 2011 12:16 am

Ok, so you're fucking stupid all the time. Not only do you not understand the difference between individual opinion and a party opinion, you're also too stupid to understand the difference between a political party and a political philosophy.

Also, the portion I quoted from you earlier carries the same logic (none) as the full sentence you wrote. Just because YOU are clueless, doesn't mean that most people - far smarter than you - have to be, little monkey.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
torkur
Sojourner
Posts: 293
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Orlando, FL, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby torkur » Mon May 23, 2011 1:18 am

Teflor Lyorian wrote:Ok, so you're fucking stupid all the time. Not only do you not understand the difference between individual opinion and a party opinion, you're also too stupid to understand the difference between a political party and a political philosophy.

Also, the portion I quoted from you earlier carries the same logic (none) as the full sentence you wrote. Just because YOU are clueless, doesn't mean that most people - far smarter than you - have to be, little monkey.



Hahahahahahahaha. I've seen plenty of your opinion and lack of thought all over the bbs, thanks. Luckily, your opinion carries as much weight to me as the bullshit you fling about little monkey. You fail to change anything and never seem to come up with a solution that isn't just whining.
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Mon May 23, 2011 1:37 pm

torkur wrote:
Teflor Lyorian wrote:Ok, so you're fucking stupid all the time. Not only do you not understand the difference between individual opinion and a party opinion, you're also too stupid to understand the difference between a political party and a political philosophy.

Also, the portion I quoted from you earlier carries the same logic (none) as the full sentence you wrote. Just because YOU are clueless, doesn't mean that most people - far smarter than you - have to be, little monkey.



Hahahahahahahaha. I've seen plenty of your opinion and lack of thought all over the bbs, thanks. Luckily, your opinion carries as much weight to me as the bullshit you fling about little monkey. You fail to change anything and never seem to come up with a solution that isn't just whining.

You got me. I come onto the TorilMUD BBS with a readership 15 people strong with the SOLE intention, no... purpose... NO! Higher Calling to change things.

Liberty coupled with a strong personal motivation to do the right thing is the only solution for man. That's all it ever has been and all it ever will be.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby kiryan » Mon May 23, 2011 4:42 pm

torkur wrote:
kiryan wrote:
you have NO idea whether they're a "gun owner" or just in posession of a gun.

== you have NO idea whether they're a lawful immigrant or just an illegal here to take american jobs and sell drugs.

I'll be happy to take your family for an outing in the park with a gun to prove the point. If you have _ANY_ uneasy feelings about me being right next to your kids and possibly openning fire....maybe doing it because someone cut me off on the drive over there so I'm in a bad mood.....maybe just having a bad day in general.... then you prove my point because I'm not a gun owner....but you have no right to ask me for papers proving this point one way or another because you're not a cop.

== blah blah blah, mexican or arab or someone driving a car without a license, blah blah blah.... then you prove my point.

== why is it illegal and discriminatory and profiling to ask someone to show their immigration papers if they can't speak english, but its ok and "good parenting" to suspect all gun owners of being law breakers. If profiling is discrimination as has been well established by the ACLU and the courts, then this is discrimination and you guys are hipocrites justifying your discrimination on the same flimsy reasons conservatives justify their discrimination... its a danger.


Discrimination:
1) ALL Latinos are illegals, can't speak English and are stealing our jobs.
2) You're too stupid to understand the difference because you're asian.


NOT Discrimination:
1) All drunk people driving a car are dangerous. According to you, we're discriminating against alcohol drinkers.
2) All texting on a cellphone while driving a car is dangerous. According to you, we're discriminating against cellphone users.
3) All people that break into your house wearing a ski mask and carrying a baseball bat are dangerous. According to you, we're discriminating against skiers and baseball players.
4) All Republicans that decide this is 1870, the Wild West, and need to act out their jerk off fantasies by carrying a gun to pretend to be cool are dangerous. According to you, we're discriminating against people who use a gun for defense, in their home, without bringing it into a crowd of people.


Torkur, discrimination is discrimination. The question is whether its justified discrimination or unjustified. You're claiming its justified discrimination to assume all gun carriers are potential bad people. Would you find it justified discrimination to pull over cars full of african american's wearing raiders jackets flashing gang signs as potential bad people? The courts say its not justified discrimination to hide out at bars and pull over people driving off to give them field sobriety tests. Would the ACLU have stayed silent had this been an african american instead of a white person?

You said: "1% of 1% of 1% of airplane flights are hijacked by terrorists."

Can you tell me what % of airplane highjackings were conducted by young, islamic/muslim, arab men? I bet its closer to 99% than it is to 0.0001%). And despite the incredibly statistical evidence, we grope 6 year old girls and 2 year old babies to not engage in discrimination. So what standard are we going to use? Whichever one fits your political agenda?
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Sarvis » Mon May 23, 2011 4:50 pm

kiryan wrote:Would you find it justified discrimination to pull over cars full of african american's wearing raiders jackets flashing gang signs as potential bad people?


Depends, would the cop do the same for white people showing the exact same behavior?

It's not discrimination to investigate a suspicious behavior. It's actually a cop's job.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby kiryan » Mon May 23, 2011 9:50 pm

what would your paramours of race relations reverend jackson and the aclu say?
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Sarvis » Mon May 23, 2011 9:57 pm

kiryan wrote:what would your paramours of race relations reverend jackson and the aclu say?


If a bunch of white guys were pulled over for acting like a gang? Probably nothing.

I never said Jackson and the ACLU didn't discriminate. I said that, all behaviors being equal, the black guys are more likely to get pulled over.

This "gun owner" was carrying a gun. That is a behavior, not an intrinsic part of his being.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby kiryan » Mon May 23, 2011 10:16 pm

So there is a difference between discriminating against the "unclean ones" in India because they pick up shit with their hands and its not a native part of their being huh? or discriminate against people who wear the American flag on their chest or car or house. Clearly you only have the right to not be discriminated against if you do everything you as society decide is ok. Never you mind your constitutional rights to be free from government intrustion and to pursue life liberty and happiness. If happiness is carrying a gun, you are to be viewed suspiciously and treated as a potential criminal. Discriminated against in job interviews and at the coffee shop. All you have to do is obey society and you'll be welcomed back as one of us, not one of them to be discriminated and harassed.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Sarvis » Mon May 23, 2011 11:13 pm

kiryan wrote:So there is a difference between discriminating against the "unclean ones" in India because they pick up shit with their hands and its not a native part of their being huh?


Well, if you didn't have that backwards no. They pick up shit because that's all their cast was really allowed to do:

Bhangi is an Indian caste or jāti traditionally treated as untouchable, and was historically restricted to three occupations: cleaning latrines, sweeping, and scavenging (which sometimes involves handling dead bodies). They prefer to be known as Balmiki. Pejoratively called "Toilet Cleaners", as it was their traditional profession, Bhangis had to carry human waste away in buckets on their heads. In the traditional Indian caste system, professions were passed on from parents to children, thus a child born in Bhangi family was forced into this profession mostly for economic reasons.


Think about this Kiryan, they are not choosing this behavior. They pick up shit because they have to, because their parents pick up shit.

Further, while you state that people avoid contact because they pick up shit the reality is that the higher castes avoid contact even of the ones who just sweep. The contact is because of their caste, not because of there behavior and is therefore discriminatory. You can't change your caste, you can't change your skin color.

You CAN, however, choose whether or not to carry a gun around outside.

or discriminate against people who wear the American flag on their chest or car or house. Clearly you only have the right to not be discriminated against if you do everything you as society decide is ok.


If you call attention to yourself then you will get attention. That is not discrimination, even if it isn't right.

Never you mind your constitutional rights to be free from government intrustion and to pursue life liberty and happiness.


So answer this: Should there be police at all? The ONLY function of a cop is to limit freedom in the interests of preventing harm to others.

If happiness is carrying a gun, you are to be viewed suspiciously and treated as a potential criminal.


Yep. Here's the funny thing: You can bitch all you want about "government intrusion." Most people would keep an eye on this guy.

Discriminated against in job interviews and at the coffee shop.


Ahh... so is it discrimination if I wear bike shorts to an interview and don't get the job? Or walk topless into a coffee shop and get kicked out?


All you have to do is obey society and you'll be welcomed back as one of us, not one of them to be discriminated and harassed.


Yeah, pretty much. Humans are actually pretty narrow minded that way.

In fact, here's what you have to say on the matter:

Kiryan wrote:and yes I'd prefer that folks not get to the point where they feel like they need to commit suicide, but if that means we have to show support for everyone else's crazy ideas and alternative life styles to keep them from killing themselves, then that's just too bad.


So there you go, you shouldn't show support for everyone else's crazy ideas. Like openly carrying a gun.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Tue May 24, 2011 8:28 pm

People We Should All Be Afraid Of (torkur and sarvis are definitely afraid of)
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
You know, Mur... I mean, Americans.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Ragorn » Tue May 24, 2011 8:48 pm

I scrolled to the bottom before I read your title for those pictures. I actually thought it was "Overpaid Public Servants."
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Your vaunted public servants seving the public

Postby Ragorn » Tue May 24, 2011 8:49 pm

Also, I'd call security if I saw someone open carrying in a grocery store. And definitely wouldn't shop there again if they permitted it.

Open carry should be subject to the same rules as smoking... establishment owners should be free to permit or ban it as they see fit.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.

Return to “Current Events & Politics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests