George Floyd killing and the aftermath

[Blazar]

Wow PB, what a strong contender for the title.

Great contribution. Thanks for the enlightenment.

[Tgo01]

Geeze. No, you don't believe in the constitution because you only believe in the parts that apply to you.

I would ask you to explain exactly when I have ever done this but let's face it, you won't do it.

Here you go. Another example of you hearing something, and taking it as truth without bothering to determine context.

Blah blah blah, quoting something that explains exactly what I said.

So I was right, the bible doesn't say "Thou shalt not kill. Period." And in fact says you can kill a thief who breaks into your home at night.

Just say it. Just say "Tgo01 you were right and I was wrong." But you can't can you? Because for all of the pomp and circumstance you proclaimed that you were better than all of us here and you weren't here to take sides and that you just wanted to discuss logic and reason, you sure do act like every other liberal around here when your argument gets torn to shreds.

[Parkbandit]

Wow PB, what a strong contender for the title.

He's a rare combination of stupidity, plus naive and feigned ignorance. Couple that with his off the chart hypocrisy, lack of self awareness and complete shortage of self control.. and you have yourself a champion.

We're going to need to see more from Blazer first.. but he's certainly a contender.

[Blazar]

I would ask you to explain exactly when I have ever done this but let's face it, you won't do it.

Except I did, in the exact same paragraph you snipped this quote from:

Refer to the post with two additional amendments that protect people from the police that you conveniently ignored, while the right to kill isn't there.

Here's the other post, for reference:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Please, explain to me how the second amendment is somehow more important than the fourth. Or even section 1 of the 14th:

AMENDMENT XIV - Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.

Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Cops killing people is depriving them of due process of law. Period. So by definition of our constitution, cops shouldn't be allowed to kill people. Yet they can, and they do, and they are not always even remotely considered justified. You can't just use the constitution as a justification for your rights, while ignoring others that should be protected, but aren't. I mean, you can, but it makes you look self serving, arrogant, and racist. I support all of our Constitution, because the principles it sets forth truly are good. We just don't live by them while claiming we do.

So I was right, the bible doesn't say "Thou shalt not kill. Period." And in fact says you can kill a thief who breaks into your home at night.

Just say it. Just say "Tgo01 you were right and I was wrong." But you can't can you? Because for all of the pomp and circumstance you proclaimed that you were better than all of us here and you weren't here to take sides you sure do act like every other liberal around here.

No, it doesn't say "You can kill." "There shall be no guilt" is not the same as saying it's okay or it's the right thing to do. And in the very next passage, it says that when the sun comes up, they are guilty. So it's nullified. So if you were right, I would be happy to agree. But you're simply not. I have already admitted I was wrong on several cases. You have yet to do so, so please don't lecture me about that. If you intentionally kill someone, it is wrong. It is wrong to take someone else's life on purpose with killing as the intent. We can agree to disagree on that one I guess. If you say "If someone breaks into my home, I'm going to kill them" verses "I'm going to defend myself if someone breaks into my home." It is actually a very different statement, right? I'm guessing you don't see a difference. The way a lot of people speak, it's the former and not the latter. Perspective is everything. And our perspectives in general are incredibly desensitized to violence.

[Blazar]

LOL face roll same thing I always say because I can't think of anything original and I lack self esteem.

FTFY

[Parkbandit]

Because for all of the pomp and circumstance you proclaimed that you were better than all of us here and you weren't here to take sides and that you just wanted to discuss logic and reason, you sure do act like every other liberal around here when your argument gets torn to shreds.

Exactly this.

I wish someone would bring something new to the table..

[Parkbandit]

I have a micropenis

No one doubted that for a moment.

[Tgo01]

Except I did, in the exact same paragraph you snipped this quote from:

Got it, you're just saying shit hoping it sticks now. Which amendments am I ignoring? When have I ever said I'm for police brutality or police murdering people?

No, it doesn't say "You can kill." "There shall be no guilt" is not the same as saying it's okay or it's the right thing to do.

The reaching! THE REACHING!

And in the very next passage, it says that when the sun comes up, they are guilty. So it's nullified.

You have to be a special kind of person to read that passage that way. So you're innocent until the sun comes up then you're guilty? What's the fucking point in that?

It clearly says if the killing takes place at night then the person isn't guilty of murder (another way of looking at it is the person was justified in their actions or it was okay to do so) but if the killing takes places during sunlight then the person is guilty of murder.

If you're not going to admit I'm right can you at least admit you were full of shit when you said you were to discuss logic? Because you're really bad at logic. Maybe time4fun can teach you.

[Tgo01]

Democrats are quickly turning into Islamic terrorists before our very eyes.

They'll shout "Black lives matter" and if you say ANYTHING other than "Black lives matter" then you are labeled a heretic and possibly even attacked and assaulted.

This is what the left always does though, they seek to control speech. You can't say "Yes I agree all lives matter" because they have labeled the term "all lives matter" to be racist.

It's insanity.

How much of a low life scum do you have to be to be offended by the phrase "all lives matter", and what's worse what kind of low life scum do you have to be to agree with these people?

[Bhaalizmo]

What a crock of shit