US Election 2020

Status
Not open for further replies.
greg0205 said:
4am on the East coast... Thought leaders are still asleep. Another hour or two before talking points get circulated.
Click to expand...

Like that time when both Temujin and Emjay coincidentally tried to argue that Mike Flynn was basically no different to the Central Park 5
 
Cray said:
Nope
Click to expand...
Good.

Cray said:
just this one debate about of a bunch of good ol boys thinking they have a right to shoot and kill an unarmed man.
Click to expand...

And that isn't exactly what happened if you look at the video. If they thought they had a right to shoot and kill an unarmed man, they would have pulled up next to him and shot him there and then. And they wouldn't have phoned the police as well if they believed they had that right.

Instead what they did was to try and stop him, and perform a "citizens arrest". Which is legal in Georgia under certain conditions. As to whether those conditions were satisfied or not is one for the lawyers. But my take on it is that you would actually need to have a really good reason to do it. So if you caught him running away with your TV for example.

How the killing happened was that there was a confrontation between Ahmaud and the guy with the gun, and that was when Ahmaud was shot. If the conditions for a citizens arrest were met, then it is a case of self defence as Ahmaud would have been attacking someone with a gun. If not (and I think this is the case), then it will be murder.

But my objections with this go beyond this and are actually on the part of the legality of the whole citizens arrest. IMO, unless it is for something where someone's life is actually at risk, I don't think it should exist. Going out and confronting a potential criminal is really f__king stupid.
 
konfab said:
Good.



And that isn't exactly what happened if you look at the video. If they thought they had a right to shoot and kill an unarmed man, they would have pulled up next to him and shot him there and then. And they wouldn't have phoned the police as well if they believed they had that right.

Instead what they did was to try and stop him, and perform a "citizens arrest". Which is legal in Georgia under certain conditions. As to whether those conditions were satisfied or not is one for the lawyers. But my take on it is that you would actually need to have a really good reason to do it. So if you caught him running away with your TV for example.

How the killing happened was that there was a confrontation between Ahmaud and the guy with the gun, and that was when Ahmaud was shot. If the conditions for a citizens arrest were met, then it is a case of self defence as Ahmaud would have been attacking someone with a gun. If not (and I think this is the case), then it will be murder.

But my objections with this go beyond this and are actually on the part of the legality of the whole citizens arrest. IMO, unless it is for something where someone's life is actually at risk, I don't think it should exist. Going out and confronting a potential criminal is really f__king stupid.
Click to expand...
Objecting to it because it is stupid or even risky isn't a valid argument.

People do and should have the right to risk their own life, if it is too risky for a normal person(or retired police man in this case) then nobody should confront criminals, ever, and we should just let crime happen.

The correct approach is when does someone have the authority to stop someone else and ask them what they are doing and then use force if they don't get a reply, in order to make the suspected person wait for the relevant authorities.

Then you could go one step deeper and ask what makes the relevant authorities the relevant authorities next. It is definitely not just because they get paid to be.
 
www.cnn.com

Judge slams the brakes on William Barr's abuse of power

Elie Honig writes that Judge Emmet Sullivan's action in the Michael Flynn case may have prevented the Justice Department from burying a valid prosecution
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com



UXbT63bQV1imTL4XuTHPHvmM-BajQdTd1HCCC2-BkllOI82VGCQm2LLWlhCxYg-gPFJsesYQ62PcYyPGlYkZ2J9NefGvGZRlN-mS7h7RWaKAr37u-vhE
 
Hamish McPanji said:
So you were just bullshitting? Seems like your SOP



There's nothing wrong with being gay. Are you suggesting that there is?

Edit: Oh, I get it. It's another false claim you are making, with no backing . Kind of like the one where I admit to following you around, which you made up. Standard SOP
Click to expand...
You implied it's bad when you used it as a degrading term , I'll give you your answers when I receive mine from you .:whistling:
 
Cray said:
Black guys generally don't go around lynching white people in the US so we I guess we'll never know...
Click to expand...
FBI stats may disagree with your assumption .
There was no lynching , it was self defense.
To call it a lynching is betrayal of those who were really lynched went through.
 
Jabulani22 said:
FBI stats may disagree with your assumption .
There was no lynching , it was self defense.
To call it a lynching is betrayal of those who were really lynched went through.
Click to expand...
They have no problem to betray real wrongs of the past in order to create new victims.
Slavery is an perfect example.
 
Jabulani22 said:
An alleged criminal reacting violently to a citizens arrest.
Click to expand...
Am curious, how do you know it was a citizens arrest, do you have the transcript of the audio where they explicitly said that, or do you just take their word for it?' Is there any evidence, apart from the word of the accused that what this was, was in fact a citizens arrest?
 
Chris_the_Brit said:
Yeah reading the report does strongly suggest that he is guilty as hell. Can he really defend receiving a briefing on 12 March and selling on 13th March?
Click to expand...

Yeah, there's no arguing the timing was coincidental. That's not going to fly.
 
Mitch McConnell is pushing the Senate to pass a measure that would let the FBI collect Americans' web-browsing history without a warrant

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is pushing forward with an amendment that would let the FBI collect records on Americans' web-browsing and search histories without a warrant this week.

McConnell proposed the amendment as part of the renewal of the 2001 Patriot Act, The Daily Beast first reported. The Senate is voting on amendments this week.

The McConnell amendment would let Department of Justice officials — overseen by Attorney General Bill Barr — look through anyone's browsing history without the approval of a judge if they deem the browsing history relevant to an investigation.
Click to expand...

Chris_the_Brit said:
Can he really defend receiving a briefing on the 12th of February before selling on 13th February?
Click to expand...

Lol. Not only will he try, conservatives will back him.
 
Randhir said:
Mitch McConnell is pushing the Senate to pass a measure that would let the FBI collect Americans' web-browsing history without a warrant
Click to expand...
Senators have narrowly rejected a bipartisan amendment that would have required the government first obtain a warrant before accessing Americans’ web browsing data.

The amendment brought by Sens. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Steve Daines (R-MT) — just seven lines in length — would have forced the government to first establish probable cause — or reasonable suspicion of a crime — to obtain the warrant. That’s a far higher bar than what’s required under existing law, which under the Patriot Act permits the bulk collection of Americans’ browsing records.

But the amendment fell short by one vote of the required 60 votes to pass the chamber.

Four senators did not vote on the amendment: Lamar Alexander (R-TN), who is in self-isolation after a staffer tested positive; Ben Sasse (R-NE); Patty Murray (D-WA); and former Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders (I-VT).
(I-VT).
Click to expand...
https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/13/senate-warrant-americans-web-browsing-data/

:sick:
 
Randhir said:
Mitch McConnell is pushing the Senate to pass a measure that would let the FBI collect Americans' web-browsing history without a warrant





Lol. Not only will he try, conservatives will back him.
Click to expand...
The Kleptocrats and Oligarchs are shifting their Communist gears into overdrive. This won't end well for them since they appear to be completely innocent of history.

It wouldn't surprise me if these cretins end up saying terms such Kleptocrats and Oligarchs is racist hate speech used by "insert hated flavour of the month".
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X