I'm not supporting the side of the coin that thinks private citizens should be disarmed. That is you.
The “lynch mob” is y’all deplorables demanding LOF cancel Rye because you don’t like his politics.
The only person between you and I that have engaged or brought that up is you. I have only stated that you are willingly engaging in that conversation, which you continue to do. So continue to be an obvious liberal idiot if you must. But at least acknowledge that YOU are the one willingly and with obvious consent deciding to continue to engage.
Yes, your party uses them constantly while lying to the public. Fully supported by your votes.
I have not suggested that. Rye is acting like a whinny little bitch because he doesn't like a conversation that he is deciding to engage in. It's the equivalent of a person banging their head against the wall, then complain to someone else because he choses to bang his head against the wall.
You on the job long enough to remember the North Hollywood Shootout? At the very least I hope you’re familiar with it. You and every other cop in America was safer before the proliferation of weapons like the AR15. If I could wave a wand and put the genie back in the bottle, my AR15 and every other like weapon in America, and go back to a revolver and shotgun, I would do it in a heartbeat.
Absolutely I’m engaging, following you’re calling my name, or do you deny that? And yes, everything is free speech in this country, however this is a private website and I doubt the owner wants beastiality discussed on it! Quit defending it as free speech, you are being idiotic!
Seems to me that Rye is pointing out the hypocrisy of LOF and this site in censoring only the voices of the left. I’d guess he’s perfectly happy getting into the mud with y’all and merely wants the rules to be enforced or not enforced evenly.
This PedoJoe business- has any family alleged any inappropriate behavior by the President? On the other hand, your favorite presidents ex-wife (and others) have alleged that he raped them and it doesn’t faze you one bit. If PedoJoe” did something criminal, let’s get a victim statement and move forward on an indictment, or just cut the libelous BS.
You don't have to put the genie back in the bottle. You can take steps today if you like. Go turn in all your guns before someone dies. Then we can go onto every single democrat voter turning in every one of their guns. That is what they support, so they should lead by example right?
I definitely called your name. It was attached to a question that had zero to do with continuing on discussing any specific topic. It was simply qualifying that you chose to engage here. And again, who keeps bringing that topic?
How many people would the Vegas shooter have killed with a revolver and speed loaders? Less than he did?
BYW, still sticking up for Chauvin? I bet you are, never mind that you simply can’t justify continuing to use force against an individual who is not resisting you and is no danger to you.
Lol.. Well that is complete bullshit from the start. More than the libturds in here have been censored, but of course you want to ignore that to make up some kind of argument in support of your comrade.
Absolutely, less would have died or been injured for sure.
Yeah? Who on your side of the aisle has been banned?
And there we have it folks. The libturd repeatedly brings up a subject, then blames someone else for it. You must have missed the reference to someone beating their head against a wall then blaming someone else. Thank you for the real life example.
I believe you were banned for being a complete jackass all around. That is speculation because I am not the one that banned you. But based on your overall performance here, that would be my educated guess.
Perhaps none, but the now illegal bump stocks didn’t help and red flag laws to take guns away from people when they start showing violent or psychotic tendencies might have helped.
I was summoned when y’all called my name. And it looks to me that your President continues to face legal jeopardy from a dozen different directions.
I’ve seen the light! The progressives were right all along! Hallelujah!
And here is where the bullshit really starts. Sticking up for Chauvin? Interesting, but you might want to do a little research back to when this whole thing started before you are made out to be even more of a jackass than we all originally thought. I have been trying to keep up with the trial between sleep and work. Personally I think he goes for the third degree based on their statutes. But that is far more based on the public needing someone to point the blame on, coupled with the city's decision to make his family multi millionaires before the trial even started, while completely ignoring the choices, and consequences of those choices, that Fentanyl Floyd made that day.
Look closely, it's a new screen name made up by GMAC. This is some really weird shit, he is now posting under two different new screen names at the same time. I've never in my life seen somebody try so hard to be a part of a group where 99.9% of the people want nothing to do with them.
I think he called Grads and got some tips.
You are still stuck on stupid. What is the definition of Pedophilia?
I don’t know if Chauvin’s actions contributed to his death (though the medical testimony says it did), but he 100% did use excessive force and needs to be held accountable at least that far.
Trump’s ex accused him of rape. I believe her AND I believe Kathleen Wiley re Clinton too.
Speaking out of both sides of your mouth. You sound about as credible as the all the experts that got dismantled on cross examination. Best part was watching them have to admit that their force policy and training was exactly what Chauvin was following, only second to them having to admit that his knee was not on his neck for 9 minutes or anywhere close to that.
Cool, investigate.
If you continue to use force against a nonresistant suspect, you are using excessive force. Pretty simple.
And I’m fine with charging his drug buddy with manslaughter too, BTW.
How do you define force in terms of a police officers use of it?
The International Association of Chiefs of Police describes use of force as the "amount of effort required by police to compel compliance by an unwilling subject".
Oh, that's cute. So how do you define it? And how did the department Chauvin worked for define it at the time?
It only matters that the Constitution and 4th Amendment prohibit unreasonable seizures. To continue to kneel on a proned out suspect handcuffed behind his back, particularly one at risk of excited delirium and certainly positional asphyxiation, beyond the point when he stops resisting- that is an unreasonable seizure. Did it kill him? I don’t know. But it was a 4th Amendment violation of Floyd’s rights and there will be an accounting for that. Using a neck restraint is not per se a 4th Amendment violation, so I understand Minneapolis may have authorized them against RESISTING suspects, but per the Supreme Court any use of force must be balanced against the Graham factors, particularly immediacy of threat, severity of the crime, resisting, and attempting to elude arrest by flight. Once Floyd lost consciousness there is not a single Graham factor supporting using ANY level of force against him and any competent officer would understand that it was time to switch hats and begin to render aid. That’s why my agency ensures the vast majority of our officers are also EMTs. My agency also treats neck restraints as deadly force and says you must have articulable facts to justify potentially deadly force before using one. I suspect Minneapolis and others will move policy in the same direction. That change is overdue.
Maybe next time I slip in dressed like you, Snickers.
