Rate of Police Shot and Killed up 59% in 2016

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I can tell when someone has nothing valid to say about my posts, they complain about brevity.

[PickelledEggs]

Ffs, shoe. More times than not, you argue simply for the sake of arguing. And when you do it, you're really nasty about it too... And you wonder why people generally don't get along with you? You keep insisting I changed, but maybe you changed a bit too.
It's interesting that you imply my positions on things are bandwagon though, when most of the time lately you misinterpret it and make it out to be more and different than what I even said. You try to force people in to saying or sound like they're saying an absolute stance on something, and if it isn't 100% in line with what yours is, you try and make it seem like it's 100% the opposing stance of yours. And not only that, you make it sound like it's the bad/evil stance.

Do again, you really wonder why people have a problem with you on here so frequently? (that's a rhetorical question, btw)

Sent from your mom.

[drunkenshoe]

Ffs, shoe. More times than not, you argue simply for the sake of arguing. And when you do it, you're really nasty about it too...

No, Pickel. A poster made a very good point (Baruch) another poster posted a snarky, one liner without offering anything to his point and after posting two threads about how people do not listen each other you jumped on his bandwagon with 'hehe that's why I just skim his posts'.  And I am expressing my reaction to it. I also explained why his point is important and why yours and Gawdzilla's is nonsense.

And I am being nasty? It seems that certain words immediately change meanings according to what you like or don't. And you choose specific words from forum rules to fit that.

And you wonder why people generally don't get along with you? You keep insisting I changed, but maybe you changed a bit too. It's interesting that you imply my positions on things are bandwagon though, when most of the time lately you misinterpret it and make it out to be more and different than what I even said. You try to force people in to saying or sound like they're saying an absolute stance on something, and if it isn't 100% in line with what yours is, you try and make it seem like it's 100% the opposing stance of yours. And not only that, you make it sound like it's the bad/evil stance.

Do again, you really wonder why people have a problem with you on here so frequently? (that's a rhetorical question, btw)

Sent from your mom.

People have a problem with me because I am not trying to please them or being politically correct when I disagree with them. Baruch was saying something very important, something fundamental.

Thak you for compliment, but being able to offer criticism of one's own culture and it is organic connection to every subject we discuss here is not a personal stance I invented, nor I have some personal claim on it.

No, I haven't changed, Pickel, I have always been like this. I'm not posting anything without making an explanation of my reaction. You however are completely another story and probably that is why I started to seem like this to you. It's like you hate being conflicted and without even thinking what it is all about, you just want people to go with a flow the way you like.

[drunkenshoe]

I can tell when someone has nothing valid to say about my posts, they complain about brevity.

Read my post again. I am not complaining about your posts's brevity.

I am saying they are empty, meaningless passive-agressive lines. And I have said this to you several times. You are not posting anything, but just same one line responses every time the similar posts-topics are up.

Baruch is saying something very important. And actually you are one the perfect targets in this forum the kind of his post should be directed at. Because you are literally unable to produce any critical thought about certain things, but act like a 5 year old whenever somebody criticises American culture, US army, American politics, white culure...etc.

[DeltaEpsilon]

In my opinion police shouldn't have guns. They should have a non-lethal, long-range weapon. A police officer should never be able to kill someone. They should only be able to stun them. The U.S Navy appears to be working on a non-lethal pulsed energy projectile which could replace a gun.

[drunkenshoe]

In my opinion police shouldn't have guns. They should have a non-lethal, long-range weapon. A police officer should never be able to kill someone. They should only be able to stun them. The U.S Navy appears to be working on a non-lethal pulsed energy projectile which could replace a gun.

That would be pretty good if turned out functional and usable. Do you have a link?

[Baruch]

"we all do indirectly" Jesus fucking Christ.

Did you pay taxes during Shrub's reign?  Then you and I both helped kill 1 million Iraqis.  This actually started during the ineffective and cruel embargo of Bill Clinton.  Both parties are callous and bloodthirsty.  I am not a pacifist, and if war with Iraq had been justifiable, I would have accepted those 1 million Iraqi deaths as an unfortunate tragedy, like German civilian deaths during WW II ... I am no pacifist.  The fact is the US can't survive without its Vietnams ... and my parents are guilty for the taxes they paid during the Vietnam war.  Korea is a little different ... because Truman intended to abandon S Korea as indefensible ... until N Korea decided otherwise.

[DeltaEpsilon]

That would be pretty good if turned out functional and usable. Do you have a link?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/pep.htm
It is supposed to be extremely painful but causes no permanent damage.

[Baruch]

That would be pretty good if turned out functional and usable. Do you have a link?

Crowd control only, to stop the sanscullotes!

http://www.alternet.org/story/151864/6_creepy_new_weapons_the_police_and_military_use_to_subdue_unarmed_people

You have to skip the fund drive pop up.

[drunkenshoe]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/pep.htm
It is supposed to be extremely painful but causes no permanent damage.

The good news is that it works. The bad news was that it weighed 500 pounds.

Then the other side will have lethal weaponry. This could work only if everyone had the same weaponry, lol.

Dunno. Doesn't look hopeful to me.

[Baruch]

Nice slander, Baruch. Good thing nobody takes you seriously.

PS ... are you protecting Saint Obama or Saint Powell ... surely not ;-)  By White folk, I mean anyone who has entitlement (Shoe is exactly correct) ... there are Black white people (not just Steve Martin) ... and while Jews are racially counted as non-White ... most American Jews have achieved Whiteness in the last 100 years.

It is precisely my Jewishness that allows me to see and color outside my nationalist box ... and why anti-Semites (nobody here) are so disturbed by our inherent narrative subversion).  Randy won't even talk to me anymore!  But then Catholics can't admit they are full of shit, particularly to Jews who know their past better than they do.

[Baruch]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/pep.htm
It is supposed to be extremely painful but causes no permanent damage.

Use of any of these weapons would excite the public's paranoia to the max.  I doubt the Bush Paraguay ranch will be safe.  Better to have a phaser that vaporizes people and leaves no sticky residue ;-)  Look, saved again by science.

[Baruch]

Thinking about my own life and how many fights I was in in my younger days.. I was robbed a few times and hit a few times when it happened, both times by black men.. I walked away both times pretty much unscathed. I have been assaulted multiple times by white men and almost every time I required hospitalization with either broken bones or pretty bad cuts and bruises.. When white men attack they're typically much more vicious for whatever reason.
More often than not in WOW (white on white) violence police will write it off as just 'good old boys having fun', but BOW violence, you better call in the marines! Lock em up and throw away the key ðŸ"'..
A few years back I was assaulted and had my face kicked in by white guys. I spent a week in the hospital with a broken eye socket, but police seemed almost completely indifferent until I called them out and threatened to go public with the media. They suddenly had the guys locked up the next day.
Point being that if you're robbed and beaten by a white guy or guys chances are the police will try to look the other way,  but get robbed and beaten by a black guy or guys and you can pretty much predict there will be a city wide dragnet out looking for them..

The police don't work for the public, they work for the System.  Bobbies first in England, but that was to kick over Tiny Tim's crutch.  That and in small towns ... the thugs are probably relatives of the sheriff.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Read my post again. I am not complaining about your posts's brevity.

I am saying they are empty, meaningless passive-agressive lines. And I have said this to you several times. You are not posting anything, but just same one line responses every time the similar posts-topics are up.

Baruch is saying something very important. And actually you are one the perfect targets in this forum the kind of his post should be directed at. Because you are literally unable to produce any critical thought about certain things, but act like a 5 year old whenever somebody criticises American culture, US army, American politics, white culure...etc.

I agree you're an asshat. Sobriety fails to find you?

[PickelledEggs]

No, Pickel. A poster made a very good point (Baruch) another poster posted a snarky, one liner without offering anything to his point and after posting two threads about how people do not listen each other you jumped on his bandwagon with 'hehe that's why I just skim his posts'.  And I am expressing my reaction to it. I also explained why his point is important and why yours and Gawdzilla's is nonsense.

And I am being nasty? It seems that certain words immediately change meanings according to what you like or don't. And you choose specific words from forum rules to fit that.

People have a problem with me because I am not trying to please them or being politically correct when I disagree with them. Baruch was saying something very important, something fundamental.

Thak you for compliment, but being able to offer criticism of one's own culture and it is organic connection to every subject we discuss here is not a personal stance I invented, nor I have some personal claim on it.

No, I haven't changed, Pickel, I have always been like this. I'm not posting anything without making an explanation of my reaction. You however are completely another story and probably that is why I started to seem like this to you. It's like you hate being conflicted and without even thinking what it is all about, you just want people to go with a flow the way you like.

Firstly: I didn't say anything about Baruch's post in this thread. It was a general statement in response to Gawdzilla. I do read some of his stuff and he does have some things that are very good. Some of it, though is absolute nonsense and drivel that no one can understand.
That was YOUR assumption. If you have a problem with me thinking what Gawdzilla said was funny, that's YOUR problem. I only made a comment, not a point. There you go again, though, assuming I said something I didn't and getting argumentative over something that was never said. I wasn't even talking about Gawdzilla's entire post, just the part where he said no one takes him seriously

Yes. You are being nasty. It has become your trademark way of conduct, whether you realize it or not. No it doesn't break the rules, until you jump in to name calling and flaming. You're not breaking rules by being nasty, you're just unpleasant to converse with.

And no. People don't care what your position is. It's the way you present your position, which going back to my previous point, you are nasty with your presentation and also are stubborn. No one cares if your position is "bandwagon" or not. Present facts and people here are pretty reasonable. The problem with you lies in the fact that even if you present good, reasonable facts, you have to sift through a load of toxicity and nastiness and overly long responses to get to and understand your point. And a lot of times you misunderstand/misrepresent the other person's point, going on a rant and tangent. It's tiring and frustrating to say the least.

Not really sure where I complimented you, but you're welcome?

And finally, if you think you haven't changed at all since we met, you have proven my point that you are at least in one way stubborn. Either by not growing as a person, or refusing to acknowledge your change in personality. Everyone changes over time. Me, you... everyone. To think that you don't is both stubborn and asinine.