New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

* To Protect and Serve*

llovejim

Current Champion
leave it to trump stooges to not even get the main message of most sensible gun control advocates, at least in this country. most agree, a huge majority, that all citizens have the right to arm themselves in their homes. and even as they travel and go to other areas where they stay on vacation or live for awhile. but not in public. that's crazy. and not assault weapons and high capacity clips. that's crazy. and not without a background check, every time. that's crazy.

that's it. so simple even a trump voter can understand.
 

OldTrapper

Council Member
leave it to trump stooges to not even get the main message of most sensible gun control advocates, at least in this country. most agree, a huge majority, that all citizens have the right to arm themselves in their homes. and even as they travel and go to other areas where they stay on vacation or live for awhile. but not in public. that's crazy. and not assault weapons and high capacity clips. that's crazy. and not without a background check, every time. that's crazy.

that's it. so simple even a trump voter can understand.
Wanna bet?
 

Fins

Fray Terror
Just a little detail to clarify, the USSC has ruled multiple times that it’s not the job of law enforcement to protect. That is a myth created by the PR department of the LAPD
 

OldTrapper

Council Member
Just a little detail to clarify, the USSC has ruled multiple times that it’s not the job of law enforcement to protect. That is a myth created by the PR department of the LAPD
Not just the LAPD. Most Americans believed the slogan posted on the side of cop cars.
 

Dawg

President
Supporting Member
leave it to trump stooges to not even get the main message of most sensible gun control advocates, at least in this country. most agree, a huge majority, that all citizens have the right to arm themselves in their homes. and even as they travel and go to other areas where they stay on vacation or live for awhile. but not in public. that's crazy. and not assault weapons and high capacity clips. that's crazy. and not without a background check, every time. that's crazy.

that's it. so simple even a trump voter can understand.
There's no such thing as an "assault weapons" assault is an Action and not a weapon. A isn't for assault it's for Armalite!

2nd amendment over rules your ignorance.
 

Dawg

President
Supporting Member
Last edited:

kaz

Small l libertarian
Just a little detail to clarify, the USSC has ruled multiple times that it’s not the job of law enforcement to protect. That is a myth created by the PR department of the LAPD
Agreed. The cops show up after the criminal is gone, draw a line around the body and make a few inquiries to see if they can figure out who did it. They seldom "protect" anyone.

We protect ourselves and our families. Government should not be disarming us and preventing us from doing that
 

llovejim

Current Champion
Just a little detail to clarify, the USSC has ruled multiple times that it’s not the job of law enforcement to protect. That is a myth created by the PR department of the LAPD
nice parsing. but ask any citizen, ask any policeman, if they or he or she thinks the main job of the police is to protect citizens, and 99.8% will say yes. that does not mean it is a constitutional mandate any more than it is a constitutional mandate that soldiers ever die in battle or jump on a live grenade to save their comrades...or it is not a constitutional mandate that physicians follow their Hippocratic Oath to "first off, do no harm"....but everyone understand it is just the same. you cannot mandate every action, every policy that any person or agency might do by constitutional decree, but you can expect the police to protect citizens without having to cite a constitutional mandate to do so.
 

Fins

Fray Terror
nice parsing. but ask any citizen, ask any policeman, if they or he or she thinks the main job of the police is to protect citizens, and 99.8% will say yes. that does not mean it is a constitutional mandate any more than it is a constitutional mandate that soldiers ever die in battle or jump on a live grenade to save their comrades...or it is not a constitutional mandate that physicians follow their Hippocratic Oath to "first off, do no harm"....but everyone understand it is just the same. you cannot mandate every action, every policy that any person or agency might do by constitutional decree, but you can expect the police to protect citizens without having to cite a constitutional mandate to do so.
You are a moron. I don’t care what you or the rest of the uneducated populace “believe”, their job is not to protect. You have the right to be wrong. Their job is to catch criminals that break the law. They have no duty to stand by your front door and keep the bad men away while you sleep.
 

llovejim

Current Champion
Agreed. The cops show up after the criminal is gone, draw a line around the body and make a few inquiries to see if they can figure out who did it. They seldom "protect" anyone.

We protect ourselves and our families. Government should not be disarming us and preventing us from doing that
that is one of the silliest opinions ever. if the police were not around, not on patrol, not available quickly, what do you think the crime rate would be? the homicide rate? the rape and assault rate? sure, everybody agrees that the best way to deter crime is CERTAINTY OF PUNISHMENT, not severity of punishment. but just having a police force, having a legal system that prosecutes criminals, PROTECTS MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF AMERICANS EACH DAY, unlike some dumbass with a loaded gun holding jiggers inside his house like a paranoid fruitcake. gun nut wimps are so ridiculous. imagine thinking the only reason these goons believe they have never been mugged or their house "invaded" is because they have a gun!! in countries with very little private gun ownership, and almost no guns in public, their violent crime rate and homicide rate and especially gun death rate are many many times less than ours.
 

Fins

Fray Terror
leave it to trump stooges to not even get the main message of most sensible gun control advocates, at least in this country. most agree, a huge majority, that all citizens have the right to arm themselves in their homes. and even as they travel and go to other areas where they stay on vacation or live for awhile. but not in public. that's crazy. and not assault weapons and high capacity clips. that's crazy. and not without a background check, every time. that's crazy.

that's it. so simple even a trump voter can understand.
And where does the constitution say that rights end in public? In public is actually where they are protected. And in public is also the most dangerous part of society, where you are more likely to need to be armed.
 

kaz

Small l libertarian
that is one of the silliest opinions ever. if the police were not around, not on patrol, not available quickly, what do you think the crime rate would be? the homicide rate? the rape and assault rate? sure, everybody agrees that the best way to deter crime is CERTAINTY OF PUNISHMENT, not severity of punishment. but just having a police force, having a legal system that prosecutes criminals, PROTECTS MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF AMERICANS EACH DAY, unlike some dumbass with a loaded gun holding jiggers inside his house like a paranoid fruitcake. gun nut wimps are so ridiculous. imagine thinking the only reason these goons believe they have never been mugged or their house "invaded" is because they have a gun!! in countries with very little private gun ownership, and almost no guns in public, their violent crime rate and homicide rate and especially gun death rate are many many times less than ours.
Swish. None of that contradicts what I said. I'm pro-cop. And I don't knee jerk blame them for everything bad that happens like you do. You're full of shit.

But the reality is that the police spend almost no time "protecting" us. They pursue the criminal after we're murdered. That does prevent other murders, but it is still not "protecting" people.

It's not their job to protect us. It would be insanely effective. And we'd have to be a police state for them to do it. We should take care to protect ourselves. What I object to is when government interferes with our protection of ourselves, our families and our property by disarming us. Then we just become victims because the police can't do it either
 
Top