Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - TheDrake

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 95
51
General Comments / Re: Voting mechanisms
« on: September 14, 2020, 02:58:53 PM »
To a 30 year old VHS tape, with no provenance, about a punch card voting system that no longer exists? There's nothing difficult at all about it, except tolerating a conspiracy theorist that would have joined QAnon if he had lived long enough. Check out his moon landing hoax expose too, I'm sure you'll find it compelling.

52
We were talking about non violent sports protests. I didn't think I had to spell out that I was referring to the famous raising of fists on the Olympic podium. But at least you've confirmed that you thought that the Civil rights movement was wrong. I'm sorry that you're pining for the 50s.

53
I'll just pocket that spirited defense for when President Biden does something similar and you go nuts about it. Like I said, wasn't worth citing the example you were clamoring for, because no matter what Trump reveals that damages the ability of our intelligence community, it's just part of his master plan.

Quote
Nuclear expert Joshua Pollack told CNBC, “This will have global repercussions,” giving the US’ adversaries valuable insight into the capabilities of its intelligence gathering technology, and called Trump’s decision to tweet the photo “so reckless.”

Calm your mind, substitute Obama in the above quote and ask yourself if you would truly react the same way.

54
He's given up our satellite capability publicly, by tweeting out classified imagery? And knowing that precise capability means enemies will now take firmer countermeasures, diminishing the capability of our surveillance. Google "trump satellite image tweet" and you can read hundreds of articles about it, but I'm sure you've read at least one before. I didn't respond because it's not worth getting your stock excuse about why it doesn't matter.

55
Quote
Now, when I mentioned the war on whistleblowers, this is an ongoing and continuing thing. The reason pardon is even being considered, even being debated, the fact that comments from the attorney general are even hitting the news is because everyone who’s followed these cases know being charged under the Espionage Act as a whistleblower means no fair trial is permitted. And there are people in the United States today serving time in prison for doing the right thing.”

That from Snowden, quoted on Breitbart. People who expose the government acting beyond its mandate, doing horrific things around the world, in any era under any administration should be pardoned and statues built to their courage. It is the very essence of doing what is moral and patriotic, even if it is illegal.

56
I should also clarify that the “ICBM” technology transferred through Loral under authorization of Bill Clinton is not “... any kind of rocketry...”. It is very specific to the particular kind of guided missile systems having intercontinental nuclear capability.

Rocketry was a lazy term, and I thought because it was obviously imprecise, would be treated as a wildcard. I couldn't find any intersection of loral, guided missile, and China.

I did find Loral fined for transferring technology they should not have, and I found Clinton approving some things, like allowing China to launch one of our satellites, according to the sparse overview of the Cox report on Wikipedia. Happy to learn more about Clinton approving the transfer of missile technology as opposed to companies doing it illegally and then being prosecuted by the Clinton DOJ.

57
I'll go with you on Snowden, Assange is okay also, and I'd add Manning as well. Anyone who exposes our government doing something illegal or immoral should be getting a pardon, by past present or future presidents. Same goes for White House "leakers" past, present and future - as long as it isn't truly sensitive or classified material. No more NDAs.

I'm against us arming or transferring military technology to ANY other nation. Sandinistas, Mujahideen, Syrians, Saudis, Turks, all of it. It makes the world more dangerous.

Its interesting that in all the reputations you call tarnished by Snowden, you didn't include GWB, who actually gave the order to put surveillance on a massive scale in place, as enabled by the overwhelmingly bipartisan "Patriot Act" renewed with full throated support year after year, regardless of administration or House control.

As for Clinton transferring "ICBM" technology, aka any kind of rocketry for military or civilian use, Let's read what the conservative Heritage Foundation has to say.

Quote
A current controversy in Washington, D.C., surrounds the possible leakage of U.S. missile technology to the People's Republic of China through the commercial use of Chinese satellite launchers. American companies are using Chinese space launch services to launch U.S. satellites with increasing frequency because they are less expensive than their counterparts in the United States. Yet, in at least one instance, U.S. technology that China's military could use to advance its military missile program may have been transferred through the commercial launch process. Acquiring such dual-use technology could allow China to build missiles capable of targeting the United States and its allies. The controversy surrounding this incident strongly suggests that the Clinton Administration's desire to promote commercial space cooperation with China has inappropriately outweighed its desire to resolve strategic security concerns with China. This imbalance in priorities may have caused Clinton Administration officials to minimize the likelihood that U.S. missile technology and know-how was transferred through commercial space cooperation.


So of course this is laughable, because they could get that same technology from Russia, France, India, Japan, and S Korea. And they would have - so why shouldn't an American company get the cash?

58
I applaud you for not going quite full QAnon. I'll leave it at that. Because it is far to broad to encompass everything all the Trumps and all the Clintons have ever done. I was asking very pointedly and specifically about revealing classified information. What was it again that Hillary exposed in those emails, other than sensitive and embarassing information? And because any president CAN reveal any and all state secrets legally, does not mean it would be a good idea. Any president CAN draw the location of every ship in the pacific fleet on a map. But we'd all, I think, call for that hypothetical President to resign immediately.

59
General Comments / Re: War with China?
« on: September 12, 2020, 04:00:31 PM »
...the most likely scenario is not China invading Taiwan. I think that only happens if Taiwan tries to declare independence. Nor do I think the US initiates military action to stop China from building bases in the South China Sea. It is far more likely that an accident due to posturing leads to escalation. There have been close encounters by both Navy and Air Forces in the region. Like when that Chinese fighter bumped into our reconnaissance aircraft and then dismantled it. I imagine Trump might go a little more hotheaded about it, which could lead to a tit-for-tat that gets out of control.

Actually, the balance of interaction between us and China has more to do with economy than the military. They are experiencing the worst flooding in their history, with millions of evacuees without food, and farmland underwatwr. China has been purchasing food from us in order to survive. They do not want to shut off that spigot.

Somebody could read this as a threat to starve human beings for a marginal geopolitical advantage.

Who would? The facts are as they are, even though the MSM doesn't mention how desperate the Chinese are at the moment. No one is threatening to cut off their food supplies, but they are very concerned by how much they need good relations with the outside world at the moment, and how they should act to maintain their own security. That "somebody" you hypothesize reacts better to positiveness than negativity. There are no threats, yet the Chinese will work to create advantageous relationships.

Oh, okay. So please explain what you meant by "shut off that spigot", because it sure sounds like YOU want us to threaten to stop shipping food.

60
I chuckle at the Trump Aplogist who would foam at the mouth and fall over backwards about a marginal email infraction by Hillary. Tell me, for once, how you would react if THAT EXACT SAME SENTENCE were in Hillary's server.

There was no "marginal email infraction" by Hillary. Hillary committed felony violations and was only protected from indictment because her entire staff was granted immunity without even being interrogated. The exact wording of the applicable legal code specifically says intention is irrelevant. What she did was a felony violation. Contents of the emails was not an issue. If you don't agree with this please explain how you would get off if you destroyed subpoenaed emails, and destroyed the hard drives that held them (with hammers and acid-wash), with full knowledge of their importance. There is a doctrine in law that permits the prosecution to assume guilt when such actions occur.

There has never been an issue that Hillary did not commit felony violations. The only issue was that there was no one to interrogate after immunity was handed out.

She was wrong. Part of the reason I could not vote for her. But please explain any lasting harm she did the nation, compared to exposing several military capabilities like your boy Trump? I think Snowden is in exile for exactly what Trump has done?

61
I chuckle at the Trump Aplogist who would foam at the mouth and fall over backwards about a marginal email infraction by Hillary. Tell me, for once, how you would react if THAT EXACT SAME SENTENCE were in Hillary's server.

62
General Comments / Re: War with China?
« on: September 12, 2020, 02:27:04 PM »
...the most likely scenario is not China invading Taiwan. I think that only happens if Taiwan tries to declare independence. Nor do I think the US initiates military action to stop China from building bases in the South China Sea. It is far more likely that an accident due to posturing leads to escalation. There have been close encounters by both Navy and Air Forces in the region. Like when that Chinese fighter bumped into our reconnaissance aircraft and then dismantled it. I imagine Trump might go a little more hotheaded about it, which could lead to a tit-for-tat that gets out of control.

Actually, the balance of interaction between us and China has more to do with economy than the military. They are experiencing the worst flooding in their history, with millions of evacuees without food, and farmland underwatwr. China has been purchasing food from us in order to survive. They do not want to shut off that spigot.

Somebody could read this as a threat to starve human beings for a marginal geopolitical advantage.

63
Shut up and entertain us! You probably would have been foaming at the mouth in 68, so you'll have to go further back to find favor for that sentiment.

64
General Comments / Re: Voting mechanisms
« on: September 12, 2020, 02:16:44 PM »
Did you post that yourself? Unconfirmed garbage not worth watching, which I didn't for a nine year old largely unwatched community TV link at best. Your credibility is beyond reproach, jackass.

65
Quote
Houston Texans' defensive end JJ Watt was left confused by boos from fans during a pre-game 'moment of unity' as protests against racism took place on the opening night of the NFL season.

Pockets of the crowd at the Kansas City Chiefs' stadium booed as players linked arms shortly before the game started.

So can we now stop with the pretense that objections are really about dishonoring veterans, and recognize it for what it is? An inability to cope with the fact that racism exists and we should be against it.

66
General Comments / War with China?
« on: September 11, 2020, 02:03:02 PM »
Quote
I do not see a hypothetical scenario where the United States attacks first, at least for the next decade or so, we'd need a LOT of ballistic missile defense systems. Which are incredibly useful in both their ability to shoot down ICBMs, which are Ballistic Missiles and because of North Korea why we have THAAD in the first place, which can more likely than not also engage against those more conventional hypersonic ballistic missiles China is billing as "Carrier Killers" where oddly enough a system which can kill the "carrier killers" before they reach their target are also able to kill ICBMs. It just becomes a question of how large and deep out reserves are kept in regards to addressing a potential nuclear strike.

It unironically puts China in the position that the more they chest thump about their Carrier Killers and how good their hypersonic missiles are, they provide the United States with all the political cover it needs to develop defenses for said carriers against the conventional threat which just so happens to incidentally also work against the nuclear one.

Meaning China's only option is to then expand their nuclear strike capabilities in order to compensate for said defenses, but as they likely build more "carrier killers" as well, the US can justify expanding their defensive ability to over-match the carrier killers.... Which puts their nuclear deterrent back in the toilet.

It's an interesting circular game China has caught itself up in on that front, but that's a digression. Back on topic, at present, there is no conceivable scenario where the US starts a war with China on its own. The only way war with China occurs is in the scenario that China either attacks a neighbor, or it attacks the United States directly(probably in the form of their "forward deployed" forces in the Asian theater of operations.

If China attacks first, they're the ones that have presumably opted to keep the nukes off the battlefield, and the United States just needs to keep its missiles defenses on hot standby. They also know that even if they launch all 50 nukes, only a few may get through, but they're not going to be able counter the hundreds the United States is likely to send back in response. So it basically come down to how China responds to America's counter-response potentially being far more effective than their generals/politicians expected.

Wanted to split this off from the long running "Trump said" thread. I think the most likely scenario is not China invading Taiwan. I think that only happens if Taiwan tries to declare independence. Nor do I think the US initiates military action to stop China from building bases in the South China Sea. It is far more likely that an accident due to posturing leads to escalation. There have been close encounters by both Navy and Air Forces in the region. Like when that Chinese fighter bumped into our reconnaissance aircraft and then dismantled it. I imagine Trump might go a little more hotheaded about it, which could lead to a tit-for-tat that gets out of control.

67
I'm perfectly content to support Trump when he does something I agree with, which is rare. I have a full throated support for the First Step Act. He supported Hong Kong. He ordered the operation that killed al-Baghdadi. He appointed Mattis.

It's unsurprising that I have to search to find things I agree with, he's a nationalist and I'm a globalist for starters. In other cases, I disagree with what he's done, but I don't take it to a melodramatic level like many do.

68
China Bad! China Bad! China Bad! Trump Good! Trump Good! Trump Good!

China is bad. Trump can be right about some things.

Quote
“China seems to be making tremendous progress. Their numbers are way down. … I think our relationship with China is very good. We just did a big trade deal. We’re starting on another trade deal with China — a very big one. And we’ve been working very closely. They’ve been talking to our people, we’ve been talking to their people, having to do with the virus.”

So was Trump wrong about this thing, or is our relationship with China very good?

69
Brilliant? Seriously? He alerted them to capabilities of a weapon that could have sunk their entire navy in 4 minutes and now they are developing counter measures to offset that advantage if a shooting war ever started? How is that briliant?

There are times when tensions get really high where leaking a weapons system may cause the other side to recalculate going to war. Just leaking it for no immediate strategic gain, other than to allow the other side to negate your current advantage seems pointless. But hey, its Trump, so it must be brilliant  ::).


Most of their navy would be sunk using weapons that have been in the Military's arsenal in some form or another since Reagan was president(and sometimes earlier). Plenty of other weapons platforms are more than capable of doing the job at considerably lower cost per attack. They just don't get there as fast. (And you're ignoring the matter of the AGM-183's needing to be flown to within range of being launched first, which would likely take the better part of a day in the first place)

I wonder if he has a weapon system to counter China's 50 ICBMs? It's silly to talk about how easy it is to sink the Navy of a nuclear power.

70
China Bad! China Bad! China Bad! Trump Good! Trump Good! Trump Good!

71
Italy banned travel from China the same day as the US did. Didn't seem too effective to me, so forgive me if I don't applaud Trump's wonderful move. Brazil was already on a trajectory at that time, and had more reported cases than China did at the corresponding time. Plus was being led by a guy who was downplaying the virus.

Iran on that date had fewer cases than Italy, but no Italian travel ban. I find it hard to believe that more Chinese were travelling to Iran than Europe, though it isn't easy to verify.

Trump's travel bans were inconsistent and did not correlate to the science. Meanwhile, at the same time he declared the ban, he was talking about how it was all going to blow over and cases would be zero soon.

72
Donald,

February 1st, 2020, the day after Trump imposed a travel ban on people entering the United States after spending two or more weeks in China, Crazy Uncle Joe made this statement. :


 "We are in the midst of a crisis with the coronavirus. We need to lead the way with science — not Donald Trump's record of hysteria, xenophobia, and fear-mongering. He is the worst possible person to lead our country through a global health emergency."

Was it an application of “science” to berate Trump for, properly, identifying Wuhan, China, as the source and active dispersal agent of COVID -19? The CCP had restricted travel from Wuhan to the rest of China, on January 23rd, but not outbound flights to the rest of the world. Should in-the-know critics feel justified in interpreting this as “Trumps fault”?

I never really had a problem with Trump's travel ban, regardless of any derogatory nicknames you'd like to use for people who criticized the move. Of course, if it hadn't taken an additional 11 days to impose a similar ban on Europe, NY might have been better off.

After China, Trump banned travel from Iran for no apparent reason. It took until 29 May to block Brazil, which is wild considering how lax they were there. It seems like he was working down his hit list.

It is all moot, now that the US has dispersed far more all on our own. Maybe we should have had a travel ban from South Dakota.

73
General Comments / Re: covid-19 outside the US
« on: September 10, 2020, 01:50:14 PM »
Quote
Israel's cabinet is to consider whether to impose a nationwide lockdown, as the country struggles to halt a steep rise in coronavirus infections.
The health ministry reported 3,904 new cases on Wednesday, a new daily record that brought the total to 142,582. The death toll also rose by 11 to 1,054.

74
General Comments / Misleading data
« on: September 10, 2020, 11:08:56 AM »
Quote
Amazon currently has 33,000 job openings for corporate and tech roles and says it will share "thousands of additional hourly roles in Amazon's Operations network" soon. All of the new employees for these roles will be paid at least minimum wage at $15 per hour with up to 20 weeks of parental leave.
The employees who fill the corporate and tech roles will receive an average pay of $150,000, including salary, stock-based compensation and benefits, an Amazon spokesperson told CNN Business.

Okay, so I think it is trashy to talk about the "Average Pay" of $150k, while also talking about the minimum wage as the floor. It makes people think of thousands of people making a ton of money.

In reality, they throw in one exec making $10,000,000 - and how many people does that offset at $30,000?

150 = (10,000 + 30*x)/(x+1)

150x+150 = 10,000 + 30x
120x = 9,850

The answer is 82.

Compensation should only be examined based on median or quintile, not mean. At least if you're going to brag about all the high paying jobs you are creating.

75
General Comments / Re: read any good books lately?
« on: September 10, 2020, 10:47:19 AM »
Reading "Flyboys" at the moment, very interesting historical notes about Japan that I didn't really know. As well as lots of other good descriptions of Japanese relations with the league of nations and trying to join the white christian countries as a colonial power and being rejected. And of course the central part of the story, the bravery shown by the fliers themselves.

"Upstream" by Dan Heath talking about how to solve public and corporate problems by moving upstream to eliminate root causes of problems rather than trying to react to late-stage consequences.

And not recent, but a personal favorite, "The Boys in the Boat" about the US Olympic Team that eventually went to Berlin and took Gold. A lot of in-depth exploration of the members of that crew, their varied backgrounds, and what motivated them.

76
General Comments / Re: Who will be next to speak out about Trump?
« on: September 10, 2020, 10:38:32 AM »
Waiting to see how Trump followers spin this.  Will the real conservatives please stand up

Well, if it's good enough for members of Congress in the past, it should be good enough for Trump to use as well?

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/08/trump-defamation-lawsuit-jean-carroll-410504

Quote
Tuohey did not elaborate, but another filing by DOJ lawyers pointed to five cases where defamation suits against federal officials have been handled as suits against the government.

“Numerous courts have recognized that elected officials act within the scope of their office or employment when speaking with the press, including with respect to personal matters, and have therefore approved the substitution of the United States in defamation actions,” the Justice Department attorneys wrote.

They cited a suit filed last year alleging that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Rep. Debra Haaland (D-N.M.) libeled students from a Catholic high school in Kentucky who got into a confrontation with a Native American activist at the Lincoln Memorial. The Cincinnati-based 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week that a judge was correct to shut down the case.

That suit involved no allegations of personal misconduct by Warren or Haaland, but Justice Department attorneys also pointed to a 2006 D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that accepted arguments from lawyers for former Rep. Cass Ballenger (R-N.C.) that a press interview he gave about his separation from his wife was within the scope of his official duties.

Pretty bad when Politico is more balanced in its reporting than NPR.

Two wrongs always make a right! You want to complain about those people doing that, be my guest. I'll be happy to entertain the possibility. But there is a big difference between Warren making a political statement, and Trump making a statement about something that happened before he was ever in public office.

77
Quote
At a press conference, Sgt Horrocks said officers were called to a "violent psych issue" and reports that a boy - who they did not name - had made "threats to some folks with a weapon". He added that there was no indication when they attended that the boy was armed.

An officer shot the boy when he tried to flee on foot, Sgt Horrocks said.

We're taking you to the hospital, even if we have to shoot you while you run away from us.

78
https://www.npr.org/2020/09/09/910975499/autistic-13-year-old-boy-shot-by-salt-lake-city-police

Quote
A police officer in Salt Lake City, Utah shot a 13-year-old boy with Asperger syndrome on Friday after his mother called 911 seeking help for her son, who was experiencing a mental health crisis.
...

Barton reportedly told officers that her son was unarmed, describing him as "a kid ... trying to get attention, he doesn't know how to regulate."

She said she was told to stay put when officers arrived at her house. Within minutes, Barton said, she heard voices yelling, "Get down on the ground," followed by several gunshots.

Another crap fest by the cops.

That austistic kid had it comin I tell ya. What do you expect when you're 13 years old and unarmed but won't obey commands? He might have tried to bite one of the officers! Again I will point out how unarmed people who are not cops could have responded to this, including someone who works in a home for troubled youth, a prison guard, a nurse....

I might puke if I hear anybody tell us how we've got to "wait to learn more" and "perhaps the officers were justified."

79
General Comments / Re: Militia in the streets
« on: September 06, 2020, 12:32:32 AM »
...I'd prefer to remain under the constitutional government we have, although there certainly are some things that need tweaked.

No, the Constitution needs to be followed rather than be ignored. Woodrow Wilson was a self-proclaimed cerebral genius educator. He wrote the handbook of treating the Constitution as a suggestion that needs to be reinterpreted by "great thinkers." John Dewey designed our educational system to create illogical "followers" who cannot follow logic and decide things for themselves. He was hoodwinked by the Engels-Marxist rhetoric, and admitted what he proposed, and why he wanted drones, instead of citizens. The Constitution can set both errors to right. But we need to get rid of the Wilsonian progressives to do so.

Well, a Balanced Budget Amendment would be a very good thing going forward. It permanently kills any attempt to propose something as insane as the "Green New Deal" going forward unless they can find a way to pay for it that won't cause the voters to toss them out of office.

It would also stop things like Trump's tax cuts. You still in?

80
Just for the record, Jennifer Griffin, Fox News security correspondent, confirmed some of the allegations with her own sources.

Trump naturally has called for her to be fired, because that's what he does for people that report the truth about him.  >:(

While at the same time, other claims made by The Atlantic in the article making the accusations against Trump are also being debunked.

Trump really couldn't attend the one service because of rain the low cloud cover resulted in Marine One being "unable to support the mission due to WX(weather)" and there was no way he was getting there in a timely manner by short-notice motorcade. (Presumably their concern with Marine One had to do with concerns about other things operating in their airspace with cloud-obstructed visibility in foreign airspace than their ability to operate the Chopper itself, but it was a valid claim by Trump.

Isn't it odd how many other world leaders managed to show up?

It's what the FOIA request turned up. Pilot advised against the trip due to what the weather reports/forecast was.

Unless you're saying Trump ordered the pilot to send official correspondence that would generate a paper trail to support his claim should someone make a FOIA request years later?

I'm sure the pilot did say that. I don't know what arrangements the other leaders made, but I'm assuming Macron would have given him a ride.

81
Just for the record, Jennifer Griffin, Fox News security correspondent, confirmed some of the allegations with her own sources.

Trump naturally has called for her to be fired, because that's what he does for people that report the truth about him.  >:(

While at the same time, other claims made by The Atlantic in the article making the accusations against Trump are also being debunked.

Trump really couldn't attend the one service because of rain the low cloud cover resulted in Marine One being "unable to support the mission due to WX(weather)" and there was no way he was getting there in a timely manner by short-notice motorcade. (Presumably their concern with Marine One had to do with concerns about other things operating in their airspace with cloud-obstructed visibility in foreign airspace than their ability to operate the Chopper itself, but it was a valid claim by Trump.

Isn't it odd how many other world leaders managed to show up?

82
General Comments / Re: Militia in the streets
« on: September 05, 2020, 12:33:06 PM »
Well according to you people should expect violent consequences if they disobey an unlawful order as well?

When it comes to LEO's best practice is to comply with their demands, legal or not, and take up the issue of the legality of their commands after the fact.

And I'm foggy on the scenario where I said that was possible, care to refresh my memory on that with context rather than the selective hat pull you just did?

As the track record of late on people keeping my comments in their proper context seems to be rather poor.

It was an impression, thus the question mark. But you just confimed my guess. The problem with bringing it up after the fact, is that most complaints go in the favor of the officer.

83
General Comments / Re: Militia in the streets
« on: September 04, 2020, 05:33:04 PM »
Well according to you people should expect violent consequences if they disobey an unlawful order as well?

84
Police will never be obsolete, evolution argues against it.

The best you can do further limit the number of things they're "on the front line" for but even that is challenging.

The idea of an unarmed person responding to domestic disputes sounds great in theory.

Until you find out many domestic disputes involved one partner or the other weilding a knife, improvised club, or just simply being a brawler. That isn't even getting into the nightmare which is domestic dispute involving a gun. In none of those scenarios is that unarmed responder capable of doing well, unless they're at a level where they could do well in a MMA tournament

Just because you don't agree with the argument doesn't give the right to characterize it as "disbanding the police" and abandoning the streets to anarchy.

85
they want the entire institution disbanded.

And you've had this explained to you multiple times as well. Nobody is trying to disband the police, that's not the slogan and that's not the policy.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html

I wonder what's in the article you didn't read, just love the headline?

"But don’t get me wrong. We are not abandoning our communities to violence. We don’t want to just close police departments. We want to make them obsolete.

We should redirect the billions that now go to police departments toward providing health care, housing, education and good jobs. If we did this, there would be less need for the police in the first place."

86
General Comments / Re: Militia in the streets
« on: September 04, 2020, 02:09:56 PM »
Quote
What about going to a protest means you should be carrying a gun?  really nothing.  Going to a planned riot and session of wanton criminality on the other hand, sure does.

The NRA would disagree with you. They believe you should go armed to church, birthday parties, definitely to protests - or did you miss all those armed guys going to down to Unite the Right?

You do realize the NRA was founded with the goal of arming blacks and training them in the use of firearms so they could defend themselves from the KKK?

You do realize the NRA advocates that law abiding citizens carry at all times so that in the event that a Criminal does strike, a "good guy with a guy" is able to intervene?

At no point has the NRA advocated for criminals to be the only ones carrying guns. Rather they advocate you have a gun because otherwise it will only be the criminals who have guns. Criminals don't need an advocacy group to tell them than being armed helps them in committing many crimes.

I don't know which is worse, that you equate going to a protest with being a criminal, or that you pick and choose which protests fall into that category.

87
General Comments / Re: How bout them apples?
« on: September 04, 2020, 02:03:48 PM »
Maybe you missed the memo. He absolutely was black. Watch the video and tell me he was trying to overpower anybody. That he was aggressive in any way. That he was a threat.

88
Quote
black and a half

Freudian slip?

89
General Comments / Re: How bout them apples?
« on: September 03, 2020, 10:19:37 PM »
If they were properly restrained in the first place, those 3.7% might not have had erectile disfunction...

 ::)

90
General Comments / How bout them apples?
« on: September 03, 2020, 07:14:58 PM »
A bit of a blow to the bad apple theory in Rochester, NY. They get called out to deal with a mentally ill man and kill him. Now mind you, there were seven police officers present, none of whom intervened when their colleague elected to pin him to the ground.

He follows orders and gets cuffed. Then he's trying to get up, so they smash him into the ground and suffocate him. He's naked, so I think we can rule out the "what if he had a weapon" argument this time round. I'm not sure exactly what kind of threat a handcuffed naked man poses, but perhaps all those cops feared he would kick them really hard if he got up.

The autopsy was ruled a homicide. In March. Six months ago. No suspension, no removal from duty, so now you've got to add police supervisors and investigators to the apple barrel. Eventually, the family had to put public pressure on the police to get them to do anything, and it was the Mayor who suspended them. Not the other police who knew about this for six months. If the family hadn't had footage, they would have been out of luck. The AG knew about it too, so you can toss another apple in the barrel.

Now the Breitbart cop apologists point out he was on PCP and spitting, and he deserves what he gets. "Good riddance" they say. Nothing wrong with a spit hood, they say, and that's maybe right. Except that Amnesty International calls it a human rights violation and the UK has abandoned their use. But he was threatening that he had coronavirus! But Amnesty in Ireland indicates that these are designed to be more porous than a cloth mask, do not in fact prevent coronavirus and may in fact increase the chance of that spreading.

Seems like a poster case for defunding the police. If they moved some money to healthcare, maybe this guy gets medication for his mental illness, or treatment for his drug addiction, or even institutionalize him. Then he's never on that street. If they moved that money to hiring a couple of orderlies, those guys might know how to cope with somebody out of his mind, just like they would in the ER. EMTs could have handled the situation, as they regularly deal with combative patients. In fact, 3.7% of all ED patients need to be restrained. I'm generally confident that this doesn't include sitting on their backs for a couple of minutes.

Of course those professionals don't get a chip on their shoulder when someone is being disobedient and decide to teach them a lesson.

91
Well if they get caught and convicted, he'll just pardon them.

It's sad because it's true...

It's sad because I bet we'll have hundreds or thousands of voter fraud cases now linked to this. There's always a couple every cycle now where some Republican who has been listening to too much fox news about how easy voting fraud and double voting is go and do it "to prove that its being done" only to end up facing criminal charges as a result of their self designed election security test. Now the president is up there telling people to vote by mail then vote in person. We're going to have a lot of new senior citizen felons as a result.

And they probably live in a state that doesn't give ex-felons voting rights.

92
General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: September 03, 2020, 10:57:49 AM »
Sure Sturgis is going to kill people off. But at least the servers and bartenders got their tips. That's what really counts.

93
General Comments / Re: Who will be next to speak out about Trump?
« on: September 03, 2020, 10:52:41 AM »
Doesn't seem like Rick's PAC is doing anything for Biden, even though he managed to plug it in the article denouncing Trump.

94
And... the president in a speech suggests people commit voter fraud to test the system. In jest?  Maybe he thinks it would be a valid test?  Who knows what this man thinks, if he actually does.  But it's almost a certainty many people will listen to him and act on his words.

Quote
So let them send it in and let them go vote, and if their system's as good as they say it is, then obviously they won't be able to vote. If it isn't tabulated, they'll be able to vote

Well if they get caught and convicted, he'll just pardon them.

95
General Comments / Re: October Surprise
« on: September 02, 2020, 08:36:03 PM »
#1 it depends on how accelerated we're talking. Preliminary data available from Stage 3 testing? Partial data from Stage 3, but not yet fully complete? Skip Stage 3, like Russia and China are doing?

#2 I think it is impossible to determine any motive of "just to help his re-election chances". It could just as easily be to save lives in a calculated risk. Putin rushed out a stage 1  :o, and he doesn't have to worry about any opposition because he has barrels full of poison.

#3 Safety should be pretty straightforward. Other drugs need a long time to evaluate because people have to take the drug on their daily schedule for quite some time.

#4 Efficacy is the tricky one. Do the antigens last, etc?

If we get #4 wrong, what happens is a false sense of security that can lead to a spike. And a lot of money down the drain. I think the real concern is the former, that people think they are protected but really are not. The only other possibility is having funds dry up for another vaccine in the pipeline that actually works. Moderna is saying their trial design doesn't allow for results before Q1 2021, but I assume that is because of having to evaluate the longevity of antibodies. Even having a short-lived vaccine at this point would be a big, if temporary, benefit. As long as people don't let their guard down and start filling up arenas.

96
General Comments / Re: Militia in the streets
« on: September 02, 2020, 08:21:46 PM »
Quote
What about going to a protest means you should be carrying a gun?  really nothing.  Going to a planned riot and session of wanton criminality on the other hand, sure does.

The NRA would disagree with you. They believe you should go armed to church, birthday parties, definitely to protests - or did you miss all those armed guys going to down to Unite the Right?

97
I don't see any of what you're describing in that video. It doesn't help that YouTube doesn't exactly let you go frame by frame and adjust the contrast and deblur. Everything is backlit by bright floodlights. If only they had a Galaxy S20 we might have been able to see something. I've looked at the footage from other angles also, I'll try to find a link (most of that is blocked on this computer).

98
they want the entire institution disbanded.

And you've had this explained to you multiple times as well. Nobody is trying to disband the police, that's not the slogan and that's not the policy.

I'm not sure why you put the actions of a leaderless mob of people on an equivalent level as a civic organization. Do you think they go to protest training, and learn their responsibilities from George Soros? Even assuming that you had someone who organized the protest, like BLM leaders, do you think that they can put a bad apple on suspension from your future events? Do you really think that if a person is  marching in a large group and someone throws a rock through a window that they have a civic duty, and if so to do what? Detain the person? I'm pretty sure that's illegal. Run away from the area because now they have become rioters and so they have to go home so as not to be tainted by it?

99
To whom it may concern, the verb is "whale" not "wail". Wailing away would mean he was bawling his eyes out.

100
No doubt it was foolish and unwise for him to be there, and just as foolish and unwise for someone to throw things at people whether they are obviously armed or not. But what it wasn't was a molotov cocktail, which I think all would agree is far more threatening.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 95