Shootings and stabbings on the rise in England....the Chinese flu isn't stopping the violence there...

[Crepitus]

The Chinese flu ......... teens in England are stabbing and shooting each other.........

So.....how is it possible, during a lockdown for the Chinese Flu, that shootings are going up.....considering they have extreme gun control laws in Britain.......anyone care to explain how that is possible?

Street Violence Is Kicking Off During Lockdown. This Is Why

Boredom and postcode rivals busting into each other's House Party chats are creating lethal beefs amid the coronavirus lockdown.

www.vice.com

There has been an explosion in the number of street stabbings and shootings in England since the beginning of lockdown, despite police claiming the measures have driven down serious violence.
-------
In Birmingham, a city with a well-deserved reputation for high gun crime, there has been a flurry of shootings and stabbings involving teenagers over the last fortnight. According to one youth crime expert, this has been sparked by boredom and lockdown-fuelled social media beefs.

Can any anti-gun extremist explain how it is possible that teens under lockdown in a country with extreme gun control...an island......have access to guns to shoot each other?

So....
This is a gun control virus?

Not sure what point you think you have, other than the one on the top of your head.

 

[Vagabond63]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

Whether there was a gun in sight or not has nothing to with the issue. Several organizations back then had guns, the point is the liberals would support the right to protest, lefties today don’t believe others should protest, only themselves have that right.

There's a world of difference between a protest march and an armed protest march, in many countries around the world (including the USA) the latter would be seen as an armed insurrection. Placards are designed to be informative, guns are designed to intimidate.

 

[2aguy]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

You mean except for these guys?

View attachment 333910

Ooh, interesting. That was when the NRA supported gun control. Notice how you posted the picture out of context.

View attachment 333937

May 2, 1967: Two dozen armed Negroes entered the state Capitol at noon today and 10 made their way to the back of the Assembly Chamber before they were disarmed and marched away by the state police.
The Assembly was in session at the time and Speaker Pro Tem Carlos Bee ordered the men removed from the chamber.
Outside the chamber, the police took away the weapons. The men argued they could carry the weapons as long as they were not concealed.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/history/article148667224.html#storylink=cpy

Just curious, were the white "protesters" disarmed and marched away by state police?

And they were wrong, and Reagan was wrong...........the Right to Keep and Bear Arms belongs to all Americans.....I know that is hard for you to understand, but maybe one day it will sink in. We have a 2nd Amendment so that our government doesn't allow 12 million innocent men, women and children to be murdered and put into mass graves by socialists.......

 

[2aguy]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

Whether there was a gun in sight or not has nothing to with the issue. Several organizations back then had guns, the point is the liberals would support the right to protest, lefties today don’t believe others should protest, only themselves have that right.

There's a world of difference between a protest march and an armed protest march, in many countries around the world (including the USA) the latter would be seen as an armed insurrection. Placards are designed to be informative, guns are designed to intimidate.

In many countries they murder their citizens for any protest.....but the ones with guns don't tend to be murdered by their governments as easily.....

Guns that are never fired are not a problem for a government..........citizens without guns are much easier to murder and bury by a government that crosses the line.......just ask the Europeans in the 1930s and 40s, the 25 million Russian Dead, the 70 million Chinese dead....

You are so dumb you don't understand that armed government has murdered more people without guns than citizens with guns have killed dumb politicians.......

 

[Papageorgio]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

Whether there was a gun in sight or not has nothing to with the issue. Several organizations back then had guns, the point is the liberals would support the right to protest, lefties today don’t believe others should protest, only themselves have that right.

There's a world of difference between a protest march and an armed protest march, in many countries around the world (including the USA) the latter would be seen as an armed insurrection. Placards are designed to be informative, guns are designed to intimidate.

In many countries around absolutely no protesting is allowed, period. The left in this country only supports protests that they feel is worthy. Your are part of the left. Real liberals, real progressives support protesting whether they are for it or against it because they realize the history and importance that protesting has had in shaping our nation.

 

[Papageorgio]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

You mean except for these guys?

View attachment 333910

Ooh, interesting. That was when the NRA supported gun control. Notice how you posted the picture out of context.

View attachment 333937

May 2, 1967: Two dozen armed Negroes entered the state Capitol at noon today and 10 made their way to the back of the Assembly Chamber before they were disarmed and marched away by the state police.
The Assembly was in session at the time and Speaker Pro Tem Carlos Bee ordered the men removed from the chamber.
Outside the chamber, the police took away the weapons. The men argued they could carry the weapons as long as they were not concealed.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/history/article148667224.html#storylink=cpy

Just curious, were the white "protesters" disarmed and marched away by state police?

So now you swing to make it a race issue by comparing 1967 and 2020? As long as the law allowed them to open carry and the guns were legally obtained, no one was hurt, the protest was fine for me. The cause doesn’t matter, the right in this country to have a free speech, freedom of expression supersedes your narrow, intolerant, left wing bigotry.

 

[Vagabond63]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

Whether there was a gun in sight or not has nothing to with the issue. Several organizations back then had guns, the point is the liberals would support the right to protest, lefties today don’t believe others should protest, only themselves have that right.

There's a world of difference between a protest march and an armed protest march, in many countries around the world (including the USA) the latter would be seen as an armed insurrection. Placards are designed to be informative, guns are designed to intimidate.

In many countries around absolutely no protesting is allowed, period. The left in this country only supports protests that they feel is worthy. Your are part of the left. Real liberals, real progressives support protesting whether they are for it or against it because they realize the history and importance that protesting has had in shaping our nation.

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

You mean except for these guys?

View attachment 333910

Ooh, interesting. That was when the NRA supported gun control. Notice how you posted the picture out of context.

View attachment 333937

May 2, 1967: Two dozen armed Negroes entered the state Capitol at noon today and 10 made their way to the back of the Assembly Chamber before they were disarmed and marched away by the state police.
The Assembly was in session at the time and Speaker Pro Tem Carlos Bee ordered the men removed from the chamber.
Outside the chamber, the police took away the weapons. The men argued they could carry the weapons as long as they were not concealed.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/history/article148667224.html#storylink=cpy

Just curious, were the white "protesters" disarmed and marched away by state police?

So now you swing to make it a race issue by comparing 1967 and 2020? As long as the law allowed them to open carry and the guns were legally obtained, no one was hurt, the protest was fine for me. The cause doesn’t matter, the right in this country to have a free speech, freedom of expression supersedes your narrow, intolerant, left wing bigotry.

Really?

 

[Papageorgio]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

Whether there was a gun in sight or not has nothing to with the issue. Several organizations back then had guns, the point is the liberals would support the right to protest, lefties today don’t believe others should protest, only themselves have that right.

There's a world of difference between a protest march and an armed protest march, in many countries around the world (including the USA) the latter would be seen as an armed insurrection. Placards are designed to be informative, guns are designed to intimidate.

In many countries around absolutely no protesting is allowed, period. The left in this country only supports protests that they feel is worthy. Your are part of the left. Real liberals, real progressives support protesting whether they are for it or against it because they realize the history and importance that protesting has had in shaping our nation.

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

You mean except for these guys?

View attachment 333910

Ooh, interesting. That was when the NRA supported gun control. Notice how you posted the picture out of context.

View attachment 333937

May 2, 1967: Two dozen armed Negroes entered the state Capitol at noon today and 10 made their way to the back of the Assembly Chamber before they were disarmed and marched away by the state police.
The Assembly was in session at the time and Speaker Pro Tem Carlos Bee ordered the men removed from the chamber.
Outside the chamber, the police took away the weapons. The men argued they could carry the weapons as long as they were not concealed.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/history/article148667224.html#storylink=cpy

Just curious, were the white "protesters" disarmed and marched away by state police?

So now you swing to make it a race issue by comparing 1967 and 2020? As long as the law allowed them to open carry and the guns were legally obtained, no one was hurt, the protest was fine for me. The cause doesn’t matter, the right in this country to have a free speech, freedom of expression supersedes your narrow, intolerant, left wing bigotry.

Really?

View attachment 339041

They were asked to leave and they refused, the police decided to arrest them. The price to protest.

 

[2aguy]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

Whether there was a gun in sight or not has nothing to with the issue. Several organizations back then had guns, the point is the liberals would support the right to protest, lefties today don’t believe others should protest, only themselves have that right.

There's a world of difference between a protest march and an armed protest march, in many countries around the world (including the USA) the latter would be seen as an armed insurrection. Placards are designed to be informative, guns are designed to intimidate.

In many countries around absolutely no protesting is allowed, period. The left in this country only supports protests that they feel is worthy. Your are part of the left. Real liberals, real progressives support protesting whether they are for it or against it because they realize the history and importance that protesting has had in shaping our nation.

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

You mean except for these guys?

View attachment 333910

Ooh, interesting. That was when the NRA supported gun control. Notice how you posted the picture out of context.

View attachment 333937

May 2, 1967: Two dozen armed Negroes entered the state Capitol at noon today and 10 made their way to the back of the Assembly Chamber before they were disarmed and marched away by the state police.
The Assembly was in session at the time and Speaker Pro Tem Carlos Bee ordered the men removed from the chamber.
Outside the chamber, the police took away the weapons. The men argued they could carry the weapons as long as they were not concealed.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/history/article148667224.html#storylink=cpy

Just curious, were the white "protesters" disarmed and marched away by state police?

So now you swing to make it a race issue by comparing 1967 and 2020? As long as the law allowed them to open carry and the guns were legally obtained, no one was hurt, the protest was fine for me. The cause doesn’t matter, the right in this country to have a free speech, freedom of expression supersedes your narrow, intolerant, left wing bigotry.

Really?

View attachment 339041

And? One is a crime the other isn't....kind of easy to understand.

Nuns are protesting in ignorance...the children are separated for their safety, since border control doesn't know if the people bringing them into the country are actually their relatives or are in reality sex traffickers or other smugglers, you doofus.........and because of the left wing 9th circuit court of appeals, we can't keep children with their parents during the time their parents are detained for criminally entering our country....you moron....it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted....

 

[Vagabond63]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

Whether there was a gun in sight or not has nothing to with the issue. Several organizations back then had guns, the point is the liberals would support the right to protest, lefties today don’t believe others should protest, only themselves have that right.

There's a world of difference between a protest march and an armed protest march, in many countries around the world (including the USA) the latter would be seen as an armed insurrection. Placards are designed to be informative, guns are designed to intimidate.

In many countries they murder their citizens for any protest.....but the ones with guns don't tend to be murdered by their governments as easily.....

Guns that are never fired are not a problem for a government..........citizens without guns are much easier to murder and bury by a government that crosses the line.......just ask the Europeans in the 1930s and 40s, the 25 million Russian Dead, the 70 million Chinese dead....

You are so dumb you don't understand that armed government has murdered more people without guns than citizens with guns have killed dumb politicians.......

Ah so we agree, guns are used to intimidate politicians, Thank you for proving my point.

 

[Vagabond63]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

Whether there was a gun in sight or not has nothing to with the issue. Several organizations back then had guns, the point is the liberals would support the right to protest, lefties today don’t believe others should protest, only themselves have that right.

There's a world of difference between a protest march and an armed protest march, in many countries around the world (including the USA) the latter would be seen as an armed insurrection. Placards are designed to be informative, guns are designed to intimidate.

In many countries around absolutely no protesting is allowed, period. The left in this country only supports protests that they feel is worthy. Your are part of the left. Real liberals, real progressives support protesting whether they are for it or against it because they realize the history and importance that protesting has had in shaping our nation.

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

You mean except for these guys?

View attachment 333910

Ooh, interesting. That was when the NRA supported gun control. Notice how you posted the picture out of context.

View attachment 333937

May 2, 1967: Two dozen armed Negroes entered the state Capitol at noon today and 10 made their way to the back of the Assembly Chamber before they were disarmed and marched away by the state police.
The Assembly was in session at the time and Speaker Pro Tem Carlos Bee ordered the men removed from the chamber.
Outside the chamber, the police took away the weapons. The men argued they could carry the weapons as long as they were not concealed.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/history/article148667224.html#storylink=cpy

Just curious, were the white "protesters" disarmed and marched away by state police?

So now you swing to make it a race issue by comparing 1967 and 2020? As long as the law allowed them to open carry and the guns were legally obtained, no one was hurt, the protest was fine for me. The cause doesn’t matter, the right in this country to have a free speech, freedom of expression supersedes your narrow, intolerant, left wing bigotry.

Really?

View attachment 339041

And? One is a crime the other isn't....kind of easy to understand.

Nuns are protesting in ignorance...the children are separated for their safety, since border control doesn't know if the people bringing them into the country are actually their relatives or are in reality sex traffickers or other smugglers, you doofus.........and because of the left wing 9th circuit court of appeals, we can't keep children with their parents during the time their parents are detained for criminally entering our country....you moron....it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted....

Utter drivel. Take your own advice, "it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted"

Family separations at US border plagued by problems, watchdog finds

Efforts to track children separated from families undermined by communication problems that raise serious questions

www.theguardian.com

3,121 desperate journeys: exposing a week of chaos under Trump's zero tolerance

Thousands of documents analyzed by the Guardian provide the most comprehensive picture yet of what happened to immigrants prosecuted under the Trump administration’s zero tolerance policy

www.theguardian.com

 

[2aguy]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

Whether there was a gun in sight or not has nothing to with the issue. Several organizations back then had guns, the point is the liberals would support the right to protest, lefties today don’t believe others should protest, only themselves have that right.

There's a world of difference between a protest march and an armed protest march, in many countries around the world (including the USA) the latter would be seen as an armed insurrection. Placards are designed to be informative, guns are designed to intimidate.

In many countries around absolutely no protesting is allowed, period. The left in this country only supports protests that they feel is worthy. Your are part of the left. Real liberals, real progressives support protesting whether they are for it or against it because they realize the history and importance that protesting has had in shaping our nation.

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

You mean except for these guys?

View attachment 333910

Ooh, interesting. That was when the NRA supported gun control. Notice how you posted the picture out of context.

View attachment 333937

May 2, 1967: Two dozen armed Negroes entered the state Capitol at noon today and 10 made their way to the back of the Assembly Chamber before they were disarmed and marched away by the state police.
The Assembly was in session at the time and Speaker Pro Tem Carlos Bee ordered the men removed from the chamber.
Outside the chamber, the police took away the weapons. The men argued they could carry the weapons as long as they were not concealed.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/history/article148667224.html#storylink=cpy

Just curious, were the white "protesters" disarmed and marched away by state police?

So now you swing to make it a race issue by comparing 1967 and 2020? As long as the law allowed them to open carry and the guns were legally obtained, no one was hurt, the protest was fine for me. The cause doesn’t matter, the right in this country to have a free speech, freedom of expression supersedes your narrow, intolerant, left wing bigotry.

Really?

View attachment 339041

And? One is a crime the other isn't....kind of easy to understand.

Nuns are protesting in ignorance...the children are separated for their safety, since border control doesn't know if the people bringing them into the country are actually their relatives or are in reality sex traffickers or other smugglers, you doofus.........and because of the left wing 9th circuit court of appeals, we can't keep children with their parents during the time their parents are detained for criminally entering our country....you moron....it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted....

Utter drivel. Take your own advice, "it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted"

Family separations at US border plagued by problems, watchdog finds

Efforts to track children separated from families undermined by communication problems that raise serious questions

www.theguardian.com

3,121 desperate journeys: exposing a week of chaos under Trump's zero tolerance

Thousands of documents analyzed by the Guardian provide the most comprehensive picture yet of what happened to immigrants prosecuted under the Trump administration’s zero tolerance policy

www.theguardian.com

Separation was due to a 9th Circuit Court of appeals ruling that said you can't keep kids with their parents when the parents are waiting for their hearing.....you shit stain......and then you have sex traffikers and other smugglers using kids as shields to get across the border....but you don't care about those kids...

You are an idiot and a fool.

 

[Vagabond63]

You are an idiot and a fool.

I see you are projecting your own failings and inadequacies onto me again.

 

[Vagabond63]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

Whether there was a gun in sight or not has nothing to with the issue. Several organizations back then had guns, the point is the liberals would support the right to protest, lefties today don’t believe others should protest, only themselves have that right.

There's a world of difference between a protest march and an armed protest march, in many countries around the world (including the USA) the latter would be seen as an armed insurrection. Placards are designed to be informative, guns are designed to intimidate.

In many countries around absolutely no protesting is allowed, period. The left in this country only supports protests that they feel is worthy. Your are part of the left. Real liberals, real progressives support protesting whether they are for it or against it because they realize the history and importance that protesting has had in shaping our nation.

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

You mean except for these guys?

View attachment 333910

Ooh, interesting. That was when the NRA supported gun control. Notice how you posted the picture out of context.

View attachment 333937

May 2, 1967: Two dozen armed Negroes entered the state Capitol at noon today and 10 made their way to the back of the Assembly Chamber before they were disarmed and marched away by the state police.
The Assembly was in session at the time and Speaker Pro Tem Carlos Bee ordered the men removed from the chamber.
Outside the chamber, the police took away the weapons. The men argued they could carry the weapons as long as they were not concealed.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/history/article148667224.html#storylink=cpy

Just curious, were the white "protesters" disarmed and marched away by state police?

So now you swing to make it a race issue by comparing 1967 and 2020? As long as the law allowed them to open carry and the guns were legally obtained, no one was hurt, the protest was fine for me. The cause doesn’t matter, the right in this country to have a free speech, freedom of expression supersedes your narrow, intolerant, left wing bigotry.

Really?

View attachment 339041

And? One is a crime the other isn't....kind of easy to understand.

Nuns are protesting in ignorance...the children are separated for their safety, since border control doesn't know if the people bringing them into the country are actually their relatives or are in reality sex traffickers or other smugglers, you doofus.........and because of the left wing 9th circuit court of appeals, we can't keep children with their parents during the time their parents are detained for criminally entering our country....you moron....it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted....

Utter drivel. Take your own advice, "it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted"

Family separations at US border plagued by problems, watchdog finds

Efforts to track children separated from families undermined by communication problems that raise serious questions

www.theguardian.com

3,121 desperate journeys: exposing a week of chaos under Trump's zero tolerance

Thousands of documents analyzed by the Guardian provide the most comprehensive picture yet of what happened to immigrants prosecuted under the Trump administration’s zero tolerance policy

www.theguardian.com

Separation was due to a 9th Circuit Court of appeals ruling that said you can't keep kids with their parents when the parents are waiting for their hearing.....you shit stain......and then you have sex traffikers and other smugglers using kids as shields to get across the border....but you don't care about those kids...

You are an idiot and a fool.

So explain the policies in Texas and New Mexico, which don't fall under the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit.

Trump administration family separation policy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Families Divided

President Donald Trump's "zero tolerance" immigration policy drew sharp rebukes after it was announced in April 2018 — especially after children who had been separated from their parents started being placed in a tent city in Tornillo. Trump signed an executive order June 20 that would keep...

www.texastribune.org

 

[Papageorgio]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

Whether there was a gun in sight or not has nothing to with the issue. Several organizations back then had guns, the point is the liberals would support the right to protest, lefties today don’t believe others should protest, only themselves have that right.

There's a world of difference between a protest march and an armed protest march, in many countries around the world (including the USA) the latter would be seen as an armed insurrection. Placards are designed to be informative, guns are designed to intimidate.

In many countries around absolutely no protesting is allowed, period. The left in this country only supports protests that they feel is worthy. Your are part of the left. Real liberals, real progressives support protesting whether they are for it or against it because they realize the history and importance that protesting has had in shaping our nation.

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

You mean except for these guys?

View attachment 333910

Ooh, interesting. That was when the NRA supported gun control. Notice how you posted the picture out of context.

View attachment 333937

May 2, 1967: Two dozen armed Negroes entered the state Capitol at noon today and 10 made their way to the back of the Assembly Chamber before they were disarmed and marched away by the state police.
The Assembly was in session at the time and Speaker Pro Tem Carlos Bee ordered the men removed from the chamber.
Outside the chamber, the police took away the weapons. The men argued they could carry the weapons as long as they were not concealed.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/history/article148667224.html#storylink=cpy

Just curious, were the white "protesters" disarmed and marched away by state police?

So now you swing to make it a race issue by comparing 1967 and 2020? As long as the law allowed them to open carry and the guns were legally obtained, no one was hurt, the protest was fine for me. The cause doesn’t matter, the right in this country to have a free speech, freedom of expression supersedes your narrow, intolerant, left wing bigotry.

Really?

View attachment 339041

And? One is a crime the other isn't....kind of easy to understand.

Nuns are protesting in ignorance...the children are separated for their safety, since border control doesn't know if the people bringing them into the country are actually their relatives or are in reality sex traffickers or other smugglers, you doofus.........and because of the left wing 9th circuit court of appeals, we can't keep children with their parents during the time their parents are detained for criminally entering our country....you moron....it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted....

Utter drivel. Take your own advice, "it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted"

Family separations at US border plagued by problems, watchdog finds

Efforts to track children separated from families undermined by communication problems that raise serious questions

www.theguardian.com

3,121 desperate journeys: exposing a week of chaos under Trump's zero tolerance

Thousands of documents analyzed by the Guardian provide the most comprehensive picture yet of what happened to immigrants prosecuted under the Trump administration’s zero tolerance policy

www.theguardian.com

Separation was due to a 9th Circuit Court of appeals ruling that said you can't keep kids with their parents when the parents are waiting for their hearing.....you shit stain......and then you have sex traffikers and other smugglers using kids as shields to get across the border....but you don't care about those kids...

You are an idiot and a fool.

So explain the policies in Texas and New Mexico, which don't fall under the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit.

Trump administration family separation policy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Families Divided

President Donald Trump's "zero tolerance" immigration policy drew sharp rebukes after it was announced in April 2018 — especially after children who had been separated from their parents started being placed in a tent city in Tornillo. Trump signed an executive order June 20 that would keep...

www.texastribune.org

The court sets a precedent that if not challenged is accepted as law and is followed or the result is going to challenged. Of course you already knew that.

 

[Vagabond63]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

Whether there was a gun in sight or not has nothing to with the issue. Several organizations back then had guns, the point is the liberals would support the right to protest, lefties today don’t believe others should protest, only themselves have that right.

There's a world of difference between a protest march and an armed protest march, in many countries around the world (including the USA) the latter would be seen as an armed insurrection. Placards are designed to be informative, guns are designed to intimidate.

In many countries around absolutely no protesting is allowed, period. The left in this country only supports protests that they feel is worthy. Your are part of the left. Real liberals, real progressives support protesting whether they are for it or against it because they realize the history and importance that protesting has had in shaping our nation.

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

You mean except for these guys?

View attachment 333910

Ooh, interesting. That was when the NRA supported gun control. Notice how you posted the picture out of context.

View attachment 333937

May 2, 1967: Two dozen armed Negroes entered the state Capitol at noon today and 10 made their way to the back of the Assembly Chamber before they were disarmed and marched away by the state police.
The Assembly was in session at the time and Speaker Pro Tem Carlos Bee ordered the men removed from the chamber.
Outside the chamber, the police took away the weapons. The men argued they could carry the weapons as long as they were not concealed.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/history/article148667224.html#storylink=cpy

Just curious, were the white "protesters" disarmed and marched away by state police?

So now you swing to make it a race issue by comparing 1967 and 2020? As long as the law allowed them to open carry and the guns were legally obtained, no one was hurt, the protest was fine for me. The cause doesn’t matter, the right in this country to have a free speech, freedom of expression supersedes your narrow, intolerant, left wing bigotry.

Really?

View attachment 339041

And? One is a crime the other isn't....kind of easy to understand.

Nuns are protesting in ignorance...the children are separated for their safety, since border control doesn't know if the people bringing them into the country are actually their relatives or are in reality sex traffickers or other smugglers, you doofus.........and because of the left wing 9th circuit court of appeals, we can't keep children with their parents during the time their parents are detained for criminally entering our country....you moron....it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted....

Utter drivel. Take your own advice, "it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted"

Family separations at US border plagued by problems, watchdog finds

Efforts to track children separated from families undermined by communication problems that raise serious questions

www.theguardian.com

3,121 desperate journeys: exposing a week of chaos under Trump's zero tolerance

Thousands of documents analyzed by the Guardian provide the most comprehensive picture yet of what happened to immigrants prosecuted under the Trump administration’s zero tolerance policy

www.theguardian.com

Separation was due to a 9th Circuit Court of appeals ruling that said you can't keep kids with their parents when the parents are waiting for their hearing.....you shit stain......and then you have sex traffikers and other smugglers using kids as shields to get across the border....but you don't care about those kids...

You are an idiot and a fool.

So explain the policies in Texas and New Mexico, which don't fall under the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit.

Trump administration family separation policy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Families Divided

President Donald Trump's "zero tolerance" immigration policy drew sharp rebukes after it was announced in April 2018 — especially after children who had been separated from their parents started being placed in a tent city in Tornillo. Trump signed an executive order June 20 that would keep...

www.texastribune.org

The court sets a precedent that if not challenged is accepted as law and is followed or the result is going to challenged. Of course you already knew that.

I didn't actually. So what you are saying is that a ruling in a court in say, Alaska, binds every other court in the entire USA to follow that ruling?

 

[Papageorgio]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

Whether there was a gun in sight or not has nothing to with the issue. Several organizations back then had guns, the point is the liberals would support the right to protest, lefties today don’t believe others should protest, only themselves have that right.

There's a world of difference between a protest march and an armed protest march, in many countries around the world (including the USA) the latter would be seen as an armed insurrection. Placards are designed to be informative, guns are designed to intimidate.

In many countries around absolutely no protesting is allowed, period. The left in this country only supports protests that they feel is worthy. Your are part of the left. Real liberals, real progressives support protesting whether they are for it or against it because they realize the history and importance that protesting has had in shaping our nation.

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

You mean except for these guys?

View attachment 333910

Ooh, interesting. That was when the NRA supported gun control. Notice how you posted the picture out of context.

View attachment 333937

May 2, 1967: Two dozen armed Negroes entered the state Capitol at noon today and 10 made their way to the back of the Assembly Chamber before they were disarmed and marched away by the state police.
The Assembly was in session at the time and Speaker Pro Tem Carlos Bee ordered the men removed from the chamber.
Outside the chamber, the police took away the weapons. The men argued they could carry the weapons as long as they were not concealed.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/history/article148667224.html#storylink=cpy

Just curious, were the white "protesters" disarmed and marched away by state police?

So now you swing to make it a race issue by comparing 1967 and 2020? As long as the law allowed them to open carry and the guns were legally obtained, no one was hurt, the protest was fine for me. The cause doesn’t matter, the right in this country to have a free speech, freedom of expression supersedes your narrow, intolerant, left wing bigotry.

Really?

View attachment 339041

And? One is a crime the other isn't....kind of easy to understand.

Nuns are protesting in ignorance...the children are separated for their safety, since border control doesn't know if the people bringing them into the country are actually their relatives or are in reality sex traffickers or other smugglers, you doofus.........and because of the left wing 9th circuit court of appeals, we can't keep children with their parents during the time their parents are detained for criminally entering our country....you moron....it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted....

Utter drivel. Take your own advice, "it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted"

Family separations at US border plagued by problems, watchdog finds

Efforts to track children separated from families undermined by communication problems that raise serious questions

www.theguardian.com

3,121 desperate journeys: exposing a week of chaos under Trump's zero tolerance

Thousands of documents analyzed by the Guardian provide the most comprehensive picture yet of what happened to immigrants prosecuted under the Trump administration’s zero tolerance policy

www.theguardian.com

Separation was due to a 9th Circuit Court of appeals ruling that said you can't keep kids with their parents when the parents are waiting for their hearing.....you shit stain......and then you have sex traffikers and other smugglers using kids as shields to get across the border....but you don't care about those kids...

You are an idiot and a fool.

So explain the policies in Texas and New Mexico, which don't fall under the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit.

Trump administration family separation policy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Families Divided

President Donald Trump's "zero tolerance" immigration policy drew sharp rebukes after it was announced in April 2018 — especially after children who had been separated from their parents started being placed in a tent city in Tornillo. Trump signed an executive order June 20 that would keep...

www.texastribune.org

The court sets a precedent that if not challenged is accepted as law and is followed or the result is going to challenged. Of course you already knew that.

I didn't actually. So what you are saying is that a ruling in a court in say, Alaska, binds every other court in the entire USA to follow that ruling?

Alaska is a state court, even the Alaskan Supreme Court is a state court and rule whether a law follows the state Constitution.

Appellate courts are federal courts, not state, and their rulings carry more weight because their rulings are based on the federal Constitution, not state and the only way to change the ruling is appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court. So when a federal judge makes a ruling, such as a stay on an executive order, it is a federal ruling and is law until it is appealed. The 9th Circuit Court is very liberal and their ruling has not been challenged as of yet and I doubt it will be.

 

[2aguy]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

Whether there was a gun in sight or not has nothing to with the issue. Several organizations back then had guns, the point is the liberals would support the right to protest, lefties today don’t believe others should protest, only themselves have that right.

There's a world of difference between a protest march and an armed protest march, in many countries around the world (including the USA) the latter would be seen as an armed insurrection. Placards are designed to be informative, guns are designed to intimidate.

In many countries around absolutely no protesting is allowed, period. The left in this country only supports protests that they feel is worthy. Your are part of the left. Real liberals, real progressives support protesting whether they are for it or against it because they realize the history and importance that protesting has had in shaping our nation.

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

You mean except for these guys?

View attachment 333910

Ooh, interesting. That was when the NRA supported gun control. Notice how you posted the picture out of context.

View attachment 333937

May 2, 1967: Two dozen armed Negroes entered the state Capitol at noon today and 10 made their way to the back of the Assembly Chamber before they were disarmed and marched away by the state police.
The Assembly was in session at the time and Speaker Pro Tem Carlos Bee ordered the men removed from the chamber.
Outside the chamber, the police took away the weapons. The men argued they could carry the weapons as long as they were not concealed.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/history/article148667224.html#storylink=cpy

Just curious, were the white "protesters" disarmed and marched away by state police?

So now you swing to make it a race issue by comparing 1967 and 2020? As long as the law allowed them to open carry and the guns were legally obtained, no one was hurt, the protest was fine for me. The cause doesn’t matter, the right in this country to have a free speech, freedom of expression supersedes your narrow, intolerant, left wing bigotry.

Really?

View attachment 339041

And? One is a crime the other isn't....kind of easy to understand.

Nuns are protesting in ignorance...the children are separated for their safety, since border control doesn't know if the people bringing them into the country are actually their relatives or are in reality sex traffickers or other smugglers, you doofus.........and because of the left wing 9th circuit court of appeals, we can't keep children with their parents during the time their parents are detained for criminally entering our country....you moron....it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted....

Utter drivel. Take your own advice, "it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted"

Family separations at US border plagued by problems, watchdog finds

Efforts to track children separated from families undermined by communication problems that raise serious questions

www.theguardian.com

3,121 desperate journeys: exposing a week of chaos under Trump's zero tolerance

Thousands of documents analyzed by the Guardian provide the most comprehensive picture yet of what happened to immigrants prosecuted under the Trump administration’s zero tolerance policy

www.theguardian.com

Separation was due to a 9th Circuit Court of appeals ruling that said you can't keep kids with their parents when the parents are waiting for their hearing.....you shit stain......and then you have sex traffikers and other smugglers using kids as shields to get across the border....but you don't care about those kids...

You are an idiot and a fool.

So explain the policies in Texas and New Mexico, which don't fall under the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit.

Trump administration family separation policy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Families Divided

President Donald Trump's "zero tolerance" immigration policy drew sharp rebukes after it was announced in April 2018 — especially after children who had been separated from their parents started being placed in a tent city in Tornillo. Trump signed an executive order June 20 that would keep...

www.texastribune.org

Trump administration family separation policy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

n 2016, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Flores v. Lynch[46][47] that detained immigrant children should be released as quickly as possible, but that parents were not required to be freed. The Obama administration complied by releasing women and children after detaining them together for 21 days.[48][47]

 

[2aguy]

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

Whether there was a gun in sight or not has nothing to with the issue. Several organizations back then had guns, the point is the liberals would support the right to protest, lefties today don’t believe others should protest, only themselves have that right.

There's a world of difference between a protest march and an armed protest march, in many countries around the world (including the USA) the latter would be seen as an armed insurrection. Placards are designed to be informative, guns are designed to intimidate.

In many countries around absolutely no protesting is allowed, period. The left in this country only supports protests that they feel is worthy. Your are part of the left. Real liberals, real progressives support protesting whether they are for it or against it because they realize the history and importance that protesting has had in shaping our nation.

The UK has its own set of problems. We Americans need to concentrate on ours. Someone needs to explain why armed hoodlums are allowed in a state's capitol building here in the U.S.

Back in the 60's and 70's these people would have been considered protesters and liberals would stand up for their right to protest. Today's lefties have no conviction, no guts and no passion. The lefties today are not liberals, they are the regressives.

This is what protesters looked like in the 1960's-70's, not a gun in sight.
View attachment 333884

You mean except for these guys?

View attachment 333910

Ooh, interesting. That was when the NRA supported gun control. Notice how you posted the picture out of context.

View attachment 333937

May 2, 1967: Two dozen armed Negroes entered the state Capitol at noon today and 10 made their way to the back of the Assembly Chamber before they were disarmed and marched away by the state police.
The Assembly was in session at the time and Speaker Pro Tem Carlos Bee ordered the men removed from the chamber.
Outside the chamber, the police took away the weapons. The men argued they could carry the weapons as long as they were not concealed.

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/history/article148667224.html#storylink=cpy

Just curious, were the white "protesters" disarmed and marched away by state police?

So now you swing to make it a race issue by comparing 1967 and 2020? As long as the law allowed them to open carry and the guns were legally obtained, no one was hurt, the protest was fine for me. The cause doesn’t matter, the right in this country to have a free speech, freedom of expression supersedes your narrow, intolerant, left wing bigotry.

Really?

View attachment 339041

And? One is a crime the other isn't....kind of easy to understand.

Nuns are protesting in ignorance...the children are separated for their safety, since border control doesn't know if the people bringing them into the country are actually their relatives or are in reality sex traffickers or other smugglers, you doofus.........and because of the left wing 9th circuit court of appeals, we can't keep children with their parents during the time their parents are detained for criminally entering our country....you moron....it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted....

Utter drivel. Take your own advice, "it would be nice if you understood the issue before you posted"

Family separations at US border plagued by problems, watchdog finds

Efforts to track children separated from families undermined by communication problems that raise serious questions

www.theguardian.com

3,121 desperate journeys: exposing a week of chaos under Trump's zero tolerance

Thousands of documents analyzed by the Guardian provide the most comprehensive picture yet of what happened to immigrants prosecuted under the Trump administration’s zero tolerance policy

www.theguardian.com

Separation was due to a 9th Circuit Court of appeals ruling that said you can't keep kids with their parents when the parents are waiting for their hearing.....you shit stain......and then you have sex traffikers and other smugglers using kids as shields to get across the border....but you don't care about those kids...

You are an idiot and a fool.

So explain the policies in Texas and New Mexico, which don't fall under the jurisdiction of the 9th Circuit.

Trump administration family separation policy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Families Divided

President Donald Trump's "zero tolerance" immigration policy drew sharp rebukes after it was announced in April 2018 — especially after children who had been separated from their parents started being placed in a tent city in Tornillo. Trump signed an executive order June 20 that would keep...

www.texastribune.org

The court sets a precedent that if not challenged is accepted as law and is followed or the result is going to challenged. Of course you already knew that.

I didn't actually. So what you are saying is that a ruling in a court in say, Alaska, binds every other court in the entire USA to follow that ruling?

It can....which is why the democrats court shop when they want to stop a Trump policy.