Post 10-31-2014, 07:39 PM
jaredsxtn

Democrat
Portland, OR
Posts: 2681
Thread: Civil unrest in Ferguson Missouri

johnnycee Wrote: Only the unbelievers consider Him to be imaginary, those of us with Faith think otherwise ,and yes He does bless those who are afflicted and suffer man's inhumanity to man and am I proud to be Christian, no I am not proud but I considered myself Blessed to have Jesus as my Savior, why that bothers you is beyond me, it doesn't bother me that you are a non-believer, why should you care if I do?
Maybe the non-believers think this way because so many supposedly Christian people in this nation have no problem with the poor being left behind; so many supposedly Christian people in this nation have no problem with our police killing unarmed teenagers; so many supposedly Christian people in this nation think women don't have a right to choose what to do with their own bodies; and so many supposedly Christian people in this country don't follow the teachings of their declared savior.

If Christians actually followed the words attributed to Jesus then we still wouldn't be grappling with racism, sexism, and countless other ism's that poison our society today. Maybe it's time for these supposedly Christian people to reread the words attributed to the savior they claim to follow. They might learn something new.

I digress though. It looks like I've fallen prey to participating in a discussion based off the logical fallacies I've railed against.
Post 10-31-2014, 01:55 PM
jaredsxtn

Democrat
Portland, OR
Posts: 2681
Thread: Civil unrest in Ferguson Missouri

AmcmurryFreedom Wrote: Having readiness in police authority is extremely necessary to protect our nation. Without Police in local, state and federal provinces, our nation would be ran by anarchy and lawless criminals.
I would suggest that even the strongest critics of police excess in this country have never suggested that we have no police. We demand that police don't treat the people they serve like villains. We demand that police treat all colors equally. And we demand that police actually do their job of protecting us instead of stopping teenagers for walking while black.

AmcmurryFreedom Wrote: Police are subjected to the same laws as everybody else and they have the same rights in the justice system to due process.
This is absolutely not true. Not even close. Police have far more rights than an average citizen. An average citizen, other than George Zimmerman, can't just walk up to someone and shoot them dead.

Police shootings are almost never tried in a court of law. A small fraction of police shootings ever make it out of a grand jury investigation with a charge filed against the officer. That very small fraction that actually does make it to trial almost always winds up with a hung jury or acquittal. So no, police are not subjected to the same laws as everybody else.

AmcmurryFreedom Wrote: I feel things did go wrong in Ferguson, but I do not feel Officer Wilson murdered a young black teenager.
Then what exactly did he do? If he didn't stop Michael Brown for walking while black then Michael Brown would still be alive. Plain and simple.
Post 10-31-2014, 01:43 PM
jaredsxtn

Democrat
Portland, OR
Posts: 2681
Thread: With D.C. set to decriminalize marijuana, Schedule I looks even more silly, no?

AmcmurryFreedom Wrote: I've been reading our Nation's history especially on the Constitution (Congrefs & establishment of the Bill-of-Rights). You have to admire those providers of our Nation's authors of the Constitution. They speak so eloquently and favor sacrifice for the better good in creating a model society. What went wrong with our direction? Too much drugs and a fast paced technology?
Our Founders, the men who wrote the Constitution, were drunk throughout the entirety of the writing process. Whiskey and beer were more common than safe drinking water back then. Humankind has always turned to intoxicants to cloud whatever is going on inside of their heads. They have for thousands of years and will continue to do so for thousands more. Allowing the Government to pick and choose what intoxicants are acceptable, like alcohol, tobacco, prescription drugs, and those that are not, like marijuana makes no sense. Why is alcohol acceptable, but marijuana is not?

AmcmurryFreedom Wrote: What happen to feeling good about one's self observing God's beauty in creation, children being born, a walk in the park, the seasons unfolding, a gentle rain, a stroll on the beach, a boss reminding you of good work, or just finding the good in people?
The First Amendment is what happened. Congress can not govern based off of observing God's beauty in creation. Congress has to govern for the greater good of our entire society and not what they think a specific religion instructs them to do.

Regardless of that, you are longing for a yesteryear that never actually happened. There has never been a time when America lived in some harmonious and drug free utopia and things went terribly wrong the last time we tried to force it. What happened last time we tried to force Americans to be pure? We saw the greatest spike in crime our nation has ever seen and wound up repealing a Constitutional Amendment for the first and only time in our nations history.

AmcmurryFreedom Wrote: I am one of many that firmly believe that America and the world has too many drugs that people rely on to escape the misery of a life they feel useless in. Many drugs, including marijuana, I have no desire to entertain.
And this is your right, but why in the world are you trying to prevent other citizens from making their own decisions? Why does it matter to you who does or doesn't use marijuana? No one will force you to do it.

AmcmurryFreedom Wrote: Drugs are never the answer to what ails you. Let the Medical profession handle the better way to dispense the drugs that you may need.
Prescription drug abuse is at epidemic levels in this country. These 'professionals' have gotten millions of Americans hooked on what can only be described as legal heroin. Big Pharma wants nothing more than to keep marijuana illegal because they know full well that their profit margins will dramatically decrease once marijuana becomes legal nationwide.

I encourage you to study up on who is funding anti-marijuana advertisements in Oregon, Alaska, and Florida. Opioid manufacturers and other pharmaceutical companies have been spending millions of dollars on advertisements in these states to encourage us to vote no. Why would opioid and pharmaceutical companies not want us to smoke marijuana? Could it possibly be because they have a monopoly and don't want to lose it?

One hundred people die every single day in this country because of a prescription drug over dose. That translates to 36,500 deaths per year. Alcohol related deaths aren't too far behind, with an average of 25,692 deaths per year. Have you ever asked yourself how many die each year because of marijuana overdose? That answer is zero. Zero people have ever died because of a marijuana overdose.
Post 10-30-2014, 08:23 PM
jaredsxtn

Democrat
Portland, OR
Posts: 2681
Thread: With D.C. set to decriminalize marijuana, Schedule I looks even more silly, no?

AmcmurryFreedom Wrote: As it appears to happen, without my vote, whatever and whenever any drug may be consumed without governmental control, thee will be the day when our off spring will say it was our fault for the calamity in delaying evolution. All the drugs you wish to consume, but not one of them is the essence of developing a being capable of improved life. It is today's mankind that needs or requires a drug to succeed. One day, that will change, just like fashion wear and our children will think how stupid we were in promoting drugs in a lifestyle.

But we will not care, will we? No, we will all be dead and gone. I'll be heaven for sure, so there's hope without dope!
I just don't understand why you care so much what someone does with their own body. People will do what they want to do to their bodies, legal or not. Why does it matter?

Stimulants have been around for thousands of years. Why do you care if one more stimulate is added to the list? Marijuana is a plant. Anyone who claims they are religious thinks that plants come 'from God.' Why would God create a plant that he doesn't want his people to consume?
Post 10-30-2014, 07:46 PM
jaredsxtn

Democrat
Portland, OR
Posts: 2681
Thread: Apple's CEO Reminds Us That Coming Out As Gay Is Still Important

Tony Johnson Wrote: I unfortunately heard about this today from a neighbor. He is not somebody who welcomes free choice. I don't think that he was too troubled though because Apple has made a lot of money for his wife. I asked: "Who cares" ? as it seemed to be nobodies business, nor does the sexual preferences of the other fortune 500 CEO's....... As he said though...... some people do care. To me that's the people with too much time on their hands and too much of their business where it doesn't belong.
Unfortunately, Ohio is said to be one of the 21 states.
That's the problem. I will totally accept the 'who cares' mentality when someone can't get fired for being who they are and when someone can marry whoever they are in love with. I honestly don't care if someone is anti-gay. We will always have bigots in this country. I just don't want it to be enshrined into law in any state.
Post 10-30-2014, 07:37 PM
jaredsxtn

Democrat
Portland, OR
Posts: 2681
Thread: Apple's CEO Reminds Us That Coming Out As Gay Is Still Important

You are absolutely correct. We are close, but we aren't there just yet.

We will be there when gay people can't get fired for being gay, as is the case in 21 states. We will be there when people don't get attacked while walking down the street with their partner. And we will be there when every state in this country allows an individual to marry the person they love.

Tim Cook is a role model for countless gay individuals who are still in the closet, but aren't yet ready to come out. The NewYorker wrote a wonderful article about this today and I encourage everyone to read it. The far right lost on this issue. Gay rights are here to stay for millions of our citizens, but we still have a lot of work to do for those in the 21 states who don't have those same rights.
Post 10-30-2014, 01:53 PM
jaredsxtn

Democrat
Portland, OR
Posts: 2681
Thread: With D.C. set to decriminalize marijuana, Schedule I looks even more silly, no?

AmcmurryFreedom Wrote: Tony, Very possibly, but what I have experience is situations of where this marijuana drug should be used with caution. Legalizing it will surely show less social gains than people would desire. This is another course humanity takes to move in a direction for improvement. History may be revealed in the far future that our off spring look back on us and say we were pretty stupid for all the drugs we took. However, it's the evolutionary course of adventure into, "try it, you'll like it" mentality, we'll all handle the fallout later.

As for Colorado and other States legalizing it...................please inform me it was not about the "MONEY". You just indicated the rewards was money. Is that your only cause to humanity.........Money?
It wasn't just about the money. It was about decriminalizing something that millions of otherwise law abiding adults in this country do. It was about treating marijuana the same way we do alcohol, prescription drugs, tobacco, and other stimulants.

We have a liquor store on damn near every corner in this country. How is that acceptable, but we should continue to lock people up for using marijuana? The government has no business determining what we should and shouldn't put in our individual bodies. You spoke of the unknown consequences with regards to crime if people are allowed to use marijuana, but every single study out there shows that marijuana does not make you more inclined to go shoot something or someone. In fact, study after study shows it has the exact opposite effect.


Post 10-30-2014, 12:56 PM
jaredsxtn

Democrat
Portland, OR
Posts: 2681
Thread: Civil unrest in Ferguson Missouri

johnnycee Wrote: just ask the 71 year old man just recently in Dallas who shot an killed the man who punched his wife to the ground and robbed her, or the grandfather who killed two of the three home invader who had more on their mind than money when they spied his teenage granddaughter in the house. It takes on average 10 to 15 minutes for a 911 dispatched officer to arrive on scene and take control of the situation and quell the threat, unfortunately that is usually 9 minutes too late. What would you have these people do?
You have an uncanny ability to come up with countless logical fallacies when debating people. We are discussing Darren Wilson and police brutality in general, not the right for an average citizen to own a weapon to use in self defense. I'm done debating you on this topic because you mightily struggle to keep focused on the topic at hand.
Post 10-30-2014, 12:29 PM
jaredsxtn

Democrat
Portland, OR
Posts: 2681
Thread: Civil unrest in Ferguson Missouri

johnnycee Wrote: You KNOW cops like to shoot first and ask questions later!! How do you know, do you have any idea of just how many officer involved shootings occur without death? Do you know also just how many police encounters end without any type of violence being done to either party? Of course not , that's what makes that statement sound so ridiculous.
It's noted that you only attacked an off-handed and obviously sarcastic opinion statement I said instead of addressing anything else in my reply. Why don't you study up on the numerous other countries who decided to take guns out of their police officers hands and the rapid drop in crime in said countries and not focus on sarcastic statements? You actually might learn something new!
Post 10-30-2014, 12:25 PM
jaredsxtn

Democrat
Portland, OR
Posts: 2681
Thread: Civil unrest in Ferguson Missouri

AmcmurryFreedom Wrote:

You need help articulating this drama.
Thanks, but I don't really need any help at all here.

AmcmurryFreedom Wrote: To say this about someone prior to a verdict, is slander, which also has laws imposed to stop falsely accusing others.
There's also this pesky thing called the First Amendment which allows me to call Darren Wilson whatever I wish. It's nearly impossible to win a defamation lawsuit in this country and any state law is largely ignored by the courts because it runs in direct violation of the First Amendment. The Missouri law states that five specific things have to happen in order for someone to be even officially accused of defamation: (1) publication, (2) of a defamatory statement, (3) that identifies the plaintiff, (4) that is false, (5) that is published with the requisite degree of fault, and (6) damages the plaintiff’s reputation. Only a handful of cases have ever been won, so I'm quite sure I'm safe from Missouri officials flying out to Oregon and filing charges against me.

AmcmurryFreedom Wrote: I would wait until an indictment and possibly a trial by peers and if warranted a murder verdict handed down before you call anybody a murderer.
You are missing the entire point of my argument, which is that there will be no indictment because police officers are able to murder citizens, whoops, I said it again, at will in this country. The legal system is set up to make it nearly impossible for them to even see the inside of a courtroom, let alone the inside of a jail cell. You keep saying to let a flawed system play out and I am arguing an entirely different point.
Post 10-30-2014, 11:55 AM
jaredsxtn

Democrat
Portland, OR
Posts: 2681
Thread: Civil unrest in Ferguson Missouri

johnnycee Wrote: Everyone who owns a gun has the license to kill if necessary, or for that fact any object can be used to kill someone if that person feels threatened , BTW, what tools would you have the local law enforcement have to enforce the laws and what level of threat would they need to employ their various tools, given the time frame they often have to work within?
We could do what many other industrialized and first world nations do, which is take guns away from the police. You know what happens when they did that? Average citizens started trusting the police again and crime went down. Not just in one country, but every country that did this. What a crazy thought! The police actually working with the people they are supposedly serving instead of treating them like the enemy. I know you cops like to shoot first and ask questions later, but countless other countries figured out a much better way to work with the citizens they are tasked with protecting.
Post 10-30-2014, 10:36 AM
jaredsxtn

Democrat
Portland, OR
Posts: 2681
Thread: Civil unrest in Ferguson Missouri

AmcmurryFreedom Wrote: Be glad there is a justice system. Misused can be a bummer, but when it works, it will keep you out of jail. For all of you calling Office Wilson a murderer, please stop listening to the news media hype. That is what they are driving your emotional level to and finding fault on a lack of real evidence.
What else would you call someone who murdered an unarmed teenager other than a murderer? A hero?

The criminal justice system is a joke when it comes to 'investigating' cops who murder people. All they have to do is say they felt threatened, their fellow police officers and union will back them up, then they get off the hook. Sometimes there is a grand jury investigation just to make it look like they are taking things seriously, but charges rarely come out of these supposed investigations. And on the extremely rare occasion charges are brought against an officer, a jury almost always sides with them or there is a hung jury. Police officers have a license to kill in this country and our current legal system does absolutely nothing about it. To suggest otherwise shows a complete and willful disregard of history and facts.
Post 10-28-2014, 06:24 PM
jaredsxtn

Democrat
Portland, OR
Posts: 2681
Thread: Civil unrest in Ferguson Missouri

L.A. Citizen Wrote: These people threaten to riot if the officer isn't indicted. Thats the issue.
No, the issue is that a white police officer murdered an unarmed black teenager and will likely walk off scot-free. The issue is that the pervasive racism in this country is an albatross we as a country are still struggling to rid ourselves of.

johnnycee Wrote: That is an absurd statement if I ever heard one, my sector was pretty much white, so no I didn't arrest 92% of Blacks for committing crimes.
Ok, I think it's time for all of us to have a little elementary school math lesson here.

Blacks make up 87.10 percent of total stops in Ferguson
Blacks make up 92.28 percent of total searches in Ferguson
Blacks make up 94.89 percent of total arrests in Ferguson
Blacks make up 87.65 percent of total citations in Ferguson

This is what I think Tony was referring to when he asked you this hypothetical question. He actually low balled the question, considering blacks make up nearly 95 percent of total arrests in Ferguson. So it really wasn't too absurd at all.

I understand you see absolutely nothing wrong with these numbers because cops can do no wrong, but these numbers are sickening to people like myself. I guess that's the difference between you and I. I see stats like this and want to throw up. You see stats like this and cheer.
Post 10-28-2014, 12:56 PM
jaredsxtn

Democrat
Portland, OR
Posts: 2681
Thread: Civil unrest in Ferguson Missouri

Are both of you suggesting that black citizens deserve it if they are recipients of racism because they may or may not have voted in the most recent election? Since when did fundamental civil and human rights become dependent on whether someone votes or not? You are also glossing over the inconvenient fact that voters don't directly elect the police officers that serve them.

What they can do is vote their entire city council out, who can then vote to fire the police chief. That new police chief would then have the power to fire the entire police force and hire a new force that is far more representative of the city itself. That's one hell of a long shot though.

Here's the elephant in the room with your supposed 'fix': one quarter of black males in Missouri (there's no official numbers for Ferguson) have been convicted of a felony and are still serving out their sentences or probation period. The number in Ferguson is undoubtedly higher than the state's (25 percent) and national (33 percent) averages because of their poor economy and astronomically high unemployment rate. This means they won't be able to participate in any election until their probation is complete, which the vast majority of will not be by the next election.

They will also never be able to serve in the police force, fire department, and countless other jobs because the vast majority of businesses require you to report your conviction history, regardless if you have completed your entire sentence and are done with parole. So a conviction is pretty much a Scarlet Letter for the vast majority of those individuals. This is America's new Jim Crow.

Regardless of whether people vote or not--what in the world does that have anything to do with an officer murdering an unarmed teenager? Let's try to minimize the red herrings and get back to the actual topic at hand.
Post 10-28-2014, 01:20 AM
jaredsxtn

Democrat
Portland, OR
Posts: 2681
Thread: Civil unrest in Ferguson Missouri

Tony Johnson Wrote: Why do you shoot an unarmed man 6 times including 2 in the head ? Reason ????????????? I didn't think so.
Come on now Tony. We are supposed to let the grand jury, who is overwhelmingly white, complete the process. We should also trust the white district attorney who is friends with the white police officers he is tasked with investigating to be completely unbiased. A white district attorney, mind you, whose father was killed by a black gunman. We should also just brush aside the the terribly racist police department who just 'happens' to stop black people over ninety percent of the time and remind ourselves that justice is blind and that we all just need to trust the 'system.'

Why shouldn't we trust a system that files charges against police officers who murder unarmed citizens at an appallingly low rate? And why shouldn't we trust the same system that let's cops off the hook even if their case is brought to a jury because the jury is typically overwhelmingly white, as well? Is it maybe because the system is rigged to basically never bring a rogue officer to justice? No, it can't be because we have a perfect system that has always been perfect.

While we're at it, why don't we just blame the protesters for being angry about the way they are treated by police who are supposed to protect and serve them? What better way to show how much you love democracy than complaining about citizens exercising their First Amendment rights in said democracy?
Displaying 1 - 15 of 1150 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 77 Next

About Us  -  Advertise  -  Contact Us  -  Terms & Conditions  -  Privacy Policy