Guys this is a joke

 

Civilian Block

Civilian Watch

Ever heard of civilian brutality, no, ill show you 

http://www.ocso.com/OfficeoftheSheriff/FallenDeputiesMemorial/tabid/221/Default.aspx

CIVILIAN BRUTALITY

WE NEED TO START VIDEOTAPING PEDESTRIANS ON THE STREET, AND PEOPLE IN THEIR CARS

ITS ON THE RISE GUYS, NO PUBLIC OFFICIAL OR PERSON IS SAFE

ALL THESE GOOD PEOPLE KILLED BY CIVILIANS, HOW COULD IT BE

STILL DON'T BELIEVE ME

Edited October 6, 201312 yr by atiwarie

What the...?

What the...?

Its a USA thing

Its a USA thing

But your grammar itself doesn't even make sense. I have no idea what you're even talking about.

 

 

 

But your grammar itself doesn't even make sense. I have no idea what you're even talking about.

 

 

 

fine I will fix it, my gosh

fine I will fix it, my gosh

 

hahahha lol

FFS... Civilian brutality? Why is there the criminal term for, then?

 

You've already lost your credibility trying to play down the police brutality previously...

Edited October 6, 201312 yr by strike

FFS... Civilian brutality? Why is there the criminal term for, then?

IDK, just tryin to get the point across

FFS... Civilian brutality? Why is there the criminal term for, then?

 

You've already lost your credibility trying to play down the police brutality previously...

I intentionally was not trying to play it down, just trying to understand everyone's opinions

Edited October 6, 201312 yr by atiwarie

FFS... Civilian brutality? Why is there the criminal term for, then?

 

You've already lost your credibility trying to play down the police brutality previously...

The point was to target COP BLOCK and Copwatch

They are not helping at all, and they are mostly provoking the police and over exaggeratng it

Police Brutality is Real, It is overhyped

The police that do commit serious brutality should be tried as criminals

FFS... Civilian brutality? Why is there the criminal term for, then?

 

You've already lost your credibility trying to play down the police brutality previously...

and I also said it was a joke

The point was to target COP BLOCK and Copwatch

They are not helping at all, and they are mostly provoking the police and over exaggeratng it

Police Brutality is Real, It is overhyped

The police that do commit serious brutality should be tried as criminals

Ok so what evidence do they have to arrest that corrupt cop if there is no cop-block? Cop-Block is a great organization who makes sure police officers are doing what they are supposed to be doing. 

 

If we have no Cop-Block, why don't you provide another solution to holding officers accountable?

Ok so what evidence do they have to arrest that corrupt cop if there is no cop-block? Cop-Block is a great organization who makes sure police officers are doing what they are supposed to be doing. 

 

If we have no Cop-Block, why don't you provide another solution to holding officers accountable?

Cop Block wants to get rid of Police it says on their site, essay to abolish police

Ok, but you never answered the question. I don't agree with abolishing police but when you have police armed with military style weapons, rolling around in big armoured trucks similar to those used in war zones, and wearing military style clothing (SWAT teams), and trained just as well as a soldier would be trained,  there is a problem because the US isn't allowed to deploy troops on its on land. But I do not agree with that "essay."

Ok so what evidence do they have to arrest that corrupt cop if there is no cop-block? Cop-Block is a great organization who makes sure police officers are doing what they are supposed to be doing. 

 

If we have no Cop-Block, why don't you provide another solution to holding officers accountable?

i got this from their site www.copblock.org

• Abolish the Police by Anthony Gregory

I'm officially closing this, please do not reply anymore

You don't get to close a thread. Moderators can close threads; that is not something members are allowed to do. I'll cut you some slack because you're new, but know that in the future, trying to act as though you have authority to close a thread (especially "officially"), tell members what they may and may not say in a thread, and generally direct discussion is itself a violation of the rules; we consider it backseat moderation.

You don't get to close a thread. Moderators can close threads; that is not something members are allowed to do. I'll cut you some slack because you're new, but know that in the future, trying to act as though you have authority to close a thread (especially "officially"), tell members what they may and may not say in a thread, and generally direct discussion is itself a violation of the rules; we consider it backseat moderation.

ok man thanks

Ok, but you never answered the question. I don't agree with abolishing police but when you have police armed with military style weapons, rolling around in big armoured trucks similar to those used in war zones, and wearing military style clothing (SWAT teams), and trained just as well as a soldier would be trained,  there is a problem because the US isn't allowed to deploy troops on its on land. But I do not agree with that "essay."

Hold up there bud, people open carry AR- 15 assault rifles and shotguns you dont know what state of mind they are in

The US has National Guard, there are many crazy people with guns and people who abuse drugs, the police should be tactically trained

Edited October 6, 201312 yr by atiwarie

ok man thanks

Hold up there bud, people open carry AR- 15 assault rifles and shotguns you dont know what state of mind they are in

The US has National Guard

 

Again, no answer. Most people that open-carry wouldn't go robbing stores or shooting down a mall or something like that. 9

Hold up there bud, people open carry AR- 15 assault rifles and shotguns you dont know what state of mind they are in

The US has National Guard

First of all, you have no clue what you are talking about. The definition of an assault rifle is an intermediate caliber rifle that is capable of switching between semi automatic (1 shot per trigger squeeze) and fully automatic (hold down trigger). Assault rifles are illegal for the public to own without a 6 month background check.

 

Next, simply because it looks "evil" doesn't mean it's an assault rifle, much like simply having a scope on a gun doesn't make it a sniper rifle. I could assault you with a pen. Hell, I could use any number of objects in a room to "assault" someone with. The only reason why a gun gets the term "assault weapon," despite that genre of firearm only killing 350 people since 2004 according to the gun hater Feinstein herself, is because it is a fear mongering tactic used to scare the ignorant.

 

If someone were to commit a crime, one wouldn't display a weapon until one is committing it. Not only is it just plain stupid, it paints a target on their back for cops. One city near me passed a law banning open carry, in contradiction to the state's law allowing open carry. That police chief told her officers don't enforce shit of that law. Cops in my area, for the most part, are able to recognize the difference between someone walking down the street with an AR-15 slung across his back in broad daylight and someone hiding in an alley behind a gas station with a shotgun at 2 am.

 

Now let's have an English lesson. The first part of the 2nd Amendment, detailing the need for a militia in order to secure a free state, is a separate clause from "right of the people." Clauses mean separate points, therefore it is saying both that a militia is needed to secure a free state, and that individuals have a right to keep and bear (carry, including openly) arms (any non-explosive weapon operated by a single soldier).

 

Furthermore, at the time of its inception, the militia was defined as a body of the common people. The founding fathers for the most part feared having a full time army would lead to tyranny, due to numerous military coups and the fact that they had just fought a military from a tyrannical government. The militia was commonly defined as any able bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. Due to lack of funds, those able bodied persons would need to purchase and keep their own weapon, which was what partly leads to the 2nd clause in the 2nd amendment.

 

Finally, the Supreme Court has ruled numerous times that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right for self preservation. This means that it is not reserved to the state, but to the people within that state. Many other states confirm that it is an individual right within the state constitution. 

First of all, you have no clue what you are talking about. The definition of an assault rifle is an intermediate caliber rifle that is capable of switching between semi automatic (1 shot per trigger squeeze) and fully automatic (hold down trigger). Assault rifles are illegal for the public to own without a 6 month background check.

 

Next, simply because it looks "evil" doesn't mean it's an assault rifle, much like simply having a scope on a gun doesn't make it a sniper rifle. I could assault you with a pen. Hell, I could use any number of objects in a room to "assault" someone with. The only reason why a gun gets the term "assault weapon," despite that genre of firearm only killing 350 people since 2004 according to the gun hater Feinstein herself, is because it is a fear mongering tactic used to scare the ignorant.

 

If someone were to commit a crime, one wouldn't display a weapon until one is committing it. Not only is it just plain stupid, it paints a target on their back for cops. One city near me passed a law banning open carry, in contradiction to the state's law allowing open carry. That police chief told her officers don't enforce shit of that law. Cops in my area, for the most part, are able to recognize the difference between someone walking down the street with an AR-15 slung across his back in broad daylight and someone hiding in an alley behind a gas station with a shotgun at 2 am.

 

Now let's have an English lesson. The first part of the 2nd Amendment, detailing the need for a militia in order to secure a free state, is a separate clause from "right of the people." Clauses mean separate points, therefore it is saying both that a militia is needed to secure a free state, and that individuals have a right to keep and bear (carry, including openly) arms (any non-explosive weapon operated by a single soldier).

 

Furthermore, at the time of its inception, the militia was defined as a body of the common people. The founding fathers for the most part feared having a full time army would lead to tyranny, due to numerous military coups and the fact that they had just fought a military from a tyrannical government. The militia was commonly defined as any able bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. Due to lack of funds, those able bodied persons would need to purchase and keep their own weapon, which was what partly leads to the 2nd clause in the 2nd amendment.

 

Finally, the Supreme Court has ruled numerous times that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right for self preservation. This means that it is not reserved to the state, but to the people within that state. Many other states confirm that it is an individual right within the state constitution. 

I cant argue anymore,you seem to spend a lot of time on google

 

Again, no answer. Most people that open-carry wouldn't go robbing stores or shooting down a mall or something like that. 9

 

 

I think the police should all wear some sort of cameras, but there could be problems with that, if most copblockers and copwatchers were not equally dicks as bad cops it would work out for me

I cant argue anymore,you seem to spend a lot of time on google

Did you really just make that statement?

C13 just completely proved all of your *fairly* ridiculous argument and you attack his intelligence...lol

 

 

I think you have extreme tunnel vision. These organizations are good, and yes they exaggerate. 

The exaggeration happens because people hate authority and being told to stop what they are doing. Therefore, any chance things can get painted very poorly, they do.

 

Secondly, if we did not have these people recording, the cops would take advantage of it and would abuse their powers more than they already do.

I 100% support police and what they do. And it is clear you do to. But come on dude, you gotta stop drinking the whole cops are almighty koolaid and see both sides of what is going on. 

Did you really just make that statement?

C13 just completely proved all of your *fairly* ridiculous argument and you attack his intelligence...lol

 

 

I think you have extreme tunnel vision. These organizations are good, and yes they exaggerate. 

The exaggeration happens because people hate authority and being told to stop what they are doing. Therefore, any chance things can get painted very poorly, they do.

 

Secondly, if we did not have these people recording, the cops would take advantage of it and would abuse their powers more than they already do.

I 100% support police and what they do. And it is clear you do to. But come on dude, you gotta stop drinking the whole cops are almighty koolaid and see both sides of what is going on. 

Dude he is 17 i doubt he went to law school and got all this info

I get what you are saying

I don't even care anymore i'm going back to talking about LCPDFR