What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Let's Nationalize the Police....

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
53,430
Reaction score
12,089
Points
2,220
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
True dat. Our problem is NOT the form of gov't we have, it's the people running it. Too many incumbents are not following the laws and are not discharging the basic functions that they were sworn to uphold and perform.
That is because the checks and balances do not work.

Disagree. The checks and balances WILL work as designed IF the people elected or appointed to a gov't position in any branch of gov't do their job as they are supposed to, without fear or favor. Alas, they do not but that doesn't mean we nee a different form of gov't. It mean we better elect and appoint better people.
That does not work, because the checks and balances do not work.
If the “checks and balances” worked, then we would not endure corruption and flawed policy, because that is what the “checks and balances” are supposed to prevent. If it is because, “they are not following the Constitution,” that means the checks and balances do not work, because the checks and balances are supposed to prevent that, as well. The checks and balances do not work, and that is probably because the three-part separation theory is improperly deployed. The three-part separation theory is probably a valid theory, but if there is any error in its deployment, then the distribution of government powers is probably not balanced, and the checks on power probably cannot work in accordance with expectations. It is very unlikely that the checks and balances are going to work correctly if the separation of government is not properly constructed.

The United States Constitution, and subsequent state constitutions, are not the products of divine revelation and incarnation of Blind Justice who virtuously allows nefarious persons to interpret and exploit indefinite aspects of the charters. The American charter system is of an antiquated design with indefinite terminologies, and was never secured by a practical system of checks and balances. “Fuzzy” is the term that we use to describe such vague rules, boundaries, and aspects of systems. It is the founders’ half-truth that they could not avoid, because although some of them could imagine the unfurling of some services, like a central bank, they did not have all of the information necessary for ordering a reliable charter, and the unformulated expansion of the government is proof of the lack of information.


Bull hockey, the powers delegated to the federal government, in the words of James Madison, are few and defined. It's lawyers and politicians that have muddied the waters with the complicity of the courts, which are suppose to be the last line of defense in federal over reach.

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. -James Madison Federalist 45

.
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
10,951
Reaction score
3,003
Points
170
Location
New Mexico
...

So say you and Weaver.
A lawyer would be a recommended, not that difficult.
Turn over the weapon and pay a fine, BFD.
WHERE is the problem?
...

Entrapped?
How were these people 'entrapped"?

The PROBLEM is that Weaver never did anything remotely illegal.
In fact, he used to be the sheriff in the area.
The federal stooge brought him a shotgun barrel and asked him to cut it down .25" less than the legal 18".
But that is NOT a crime and that should be obvious to anyone.
As just a barrel, it is NOT a shotgun, and the finished product could have had a barrel choke threaded on, making it over 18" in length. Or in fact it could have been used for not a shotgun at all, but for something like launching grappling hooks on a ship.

But the BATF wanted to squeeze Randy Weaver in order to get him to set up other people for deliberate false arrests.
They did not particularly want or care about Weaver.
But the penalty for a sawed off shotgun is NOT just a fine.
It is a mandatory 5 year prison sentence.
(And by the way, mandatory sentences are also illegal.)

The only thing I agree with you about is that ignoring it did not make it better.
He should have gone to court and fought it.
But the BATF were the ones who opened fire first, without any provocation.
 

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
53,430
Reaction score
12,089
Points
2,220
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
Just take all the straight white males out of the police force and everything will be solved.

it’s so simple and obvious. Conservatives will never allow it, but Biden could easily get it done with a stroke of a pen

I like the idea of a nationalized police force. This would give the government the authority to purge all the white men from the police force. It would never get done at the local level,especially in rural, white supremacist America


I bet you believe in fairy tales as well.

.
20 yrs ago it would have been considered a dream. Today it’s a very likely possibility. We’ve made many positive changes these past few years
And exactly how do you think your non-white male police force is going to treat you and the other people like you? I'll give you a hint, most whites are a lot more tolerant than most "people of color" most of the blacks I've known are extremely homophobic. Your rights would evaporate like spit on a griddle. I almost wish you'd get what you want, it would be amusing to hear you bleat about the abuse and beatdowns you'd suffer then.


The fact is there are majority minority police forces in cities all over the country and they're still accused of racism. The fact is all these claims of racism are bullshit meant to keep minorities on the commie plantation. You want to see mass minority funerals, defund the police.

.
 

fncceo

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2016
Messages
29,554
Reaction score
15,910
Points
1,415
My solution is that at first when you disrespect a cop,

Police don't need your respect. In many cases they don't even want your respect. What they do need, are to what they are legally entitled, is your compliance.
 

Smokin' OP

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Messages
1,714
Reaction score
915
Points
893
Location
Florida
...

So say you and Weaver.
A lawyer would be a recommended, not that difficult.
Turn over the weapon and pay a fine, BFD.
WHERE is the problem?
...

Entrapped?
How were these people 'entrapped"?

The PROBLEM is that Weaver never did anything remotely illegal.
In fact, he used to be the sheriff in the area.
The federal stooge brought him a shotgun barrel and asked him to cut it down .25" less than the legal 18".
But that is NOT a crime and that should be obvious to anyone.
As just a barrel, it is NOT a shotgun, and the finished product could have had a barrel choke threaded on, making it over 18" in length. Or in fact it could have been used for not a shotgun at all, but for something like launching grappling hooks on a ship.

But the BATF wanted to squeeze Randy Weaver in order to get him to set up other people for deliberate false arrests.
They did not particularly want or care about Weaver.
But the penalty for a sawed off shotgun is NOT just a fine.
It is a mandatory 5 year prison sentence.
(And by the way, mandatory sentences are also illegal.)

The only thing I agree with you about is that ignoring it did not make it better.
He should have gone to court and fought it.
But the BATF were the ones who opened fire first, without any provocation.

Weaver was never a sheriff, he worked for John Deere, right after his hitch in the army.
Weaver sold an ATF informant two shotguns that were shorter than the federal limit, the ATF was in possession of these weapons.
Weaver was supposed to go to court for this but a schedule change requested by Weaver, through his lawyer and probation officer.
Between the clerk of courts, the lawyer, probation officer, a federal holiday and Weaver, everything got cross wired, Weaver missed his court date, that's when a warrant was issued, the rest his history.
The incident is a he said, he said type of situation but all were armed Weavers son, brother and himself when the shooting started.
So, you could be ri
...

So say you and Weaver.
A lawyer would be a recommended, not that difficult.
Turn over the weapon and pay a fine, BFD.
WHERE is the problem?
...

Entrapped?
How were these people 'entrapped"?

The PROBLEM is that Weaver never did anything remotely illegal.
In fact, he used to be the sheriff in the area.
The federal stooge brought him a shotgun barrel and asked him to cut it down .25" less than the legal 18".
But that is NOT a crime and that should be obvious to anyone.
As just a barrel, it is NOT a shotgun, and the finished product could have had a barrel choke threaded on, making it over 18" in length. Or in fact it could have been used for not a shotgun at all, but for something like launching grappling hooks on a ship.

But the BATF wanted to squeeze Randy Weaver in order to get him to set up other people for deliberate false arrests.
They did not particularly want or care about Weaver.
But the penalty for a sawed off shotgun is NOT just a fine.
It is a mandatory 5 year prison sentence.
(And by the way, mandatory sentences are also illegal.)

The only thing I agree with you about is that ignoring it did not make it better.
He should have gone to court and fought it.
But the BATF were the ones who opened fire first, without any provocation.

Weaver was never a sheriff, he worked for John Deere, right after his hitch in the army.
Weaver sold an ATF informant two shotguns that were shorter than the federal limit, the ATF was in possession of these weapons.
Weaver was supposed to go to court for this but a schedule change requested by Weaver, through his lawyer and probation officer.
Between the clerk of courts, the lawyer, probation officer, a federal holiday and Weaver, everything got cross wired, Weaver missed his court date, that's when a warrant was issued, the rest his history.
The incident is a he said, he said type of situation but all were armed, Weavers son, brother and himself when the shooting started in the woods near Weavers cabin.
So, you could be right.
THAT'S what provoked the standoff.
 

Prof.Lunaphiles

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2020
Messages
2,282
Reaction score
1,451
Points
938
Location
Transient
Bull hockey, the powers delegated to the federal government, in the words of James Madison, are few and defined. It's lawyers and politicians that have muddied the waters with the complicity of the courts, which are suppose to be the last line of defense in federal over reach.
That means the checks and balances do not work. And the checks and balances probably do not work , because the separation of the government is inadequately demarcated and commissioned.

No doubt you have heard that the founders warned about the problem of expanding the government. That is because the founders knew that an expanded government would have to be reorganized to better separate the entities and balance the powers.
 

Meister

Diamond Member
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
44,516
Reaction score
17,874
Points
2,290
Location
Conservative part of the Northwest
Just take all the straight white males out of the police force and everything will be solved.

it’s so simple and obvious. Conservatives will never allow it, but Biden could easily get it done with a stroke of a pen

I like the idea of a nationalized police force. This would give the government the authority to purge all the white men from the police force. It would never get done at the local level,especially in rural, white supremacist America
That is damn American of you...do you racist often?
Now go find your butt buddy.
 

Billiejeens

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Messages
13,764
Reaction score
7,558
Points
995
Just take all the straight white males out of the police force and everything will be solved.

it’s so simple and obvious. Conservatives will never allow it, but Biden could easily get it done with a stroke of a pen

I like the idea of a nationalized police force. This would give the government the authority to purge all the white men from the police force. It would never get done at the local level,especially in rural, white supremacist America
How do we take the straight white males and fire them? I would just say I wear dresses during my down time and call myself Klinger. I'm sure no one here has ever called you a fucking moron, but I shall.

Actually odds are that everyone has.
 

Billiejeens

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Messages
13,764
Reaction score
7,558
Points
995
Just take all the straight white males out of the police force and everything will be solved.

it’s so simple and obvious. Conservatives will never allow it, but Biden could easily get it done with a stroke of a pen

I like the idea of a nationalized police force. This would give the government the authority to purge all the white men from the police force. It would never get done at the local level,especially in rural, white supremacist America


I bet you believe in fairy tales as well.

.


Fairies for sure.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$280.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top