I see Boris has renewed his ******* permit

Another day, another b_l embarrassment. Some things just never get old.
I'm so glad he's finally over his depression of Mike leaving; things were far too sensible without him for a while.

Wow. CCCP has gone insane. It's funny how he disregards me for wanting to change the electoral college, but now he argues against due process, a basic right in the constitution. Bonkers.

Posted by tangplay on 6/26/2018 11:16:00 AM (view original):
Wow. CCCP has gone insane. It's funny how he disregards me for wanting to change the electoral college, but now he argues against due process, a basic right in the constitution. Bonkers.

False equivalency yet again. Thanks for playing. When a perp shoots a police officer and he shoots back, is that due process? Y or N?

Answer. Because bad luck refuses to.

I'll give you some sage advice. You want to be a reporter. Listen to the Sunday podcast of Ben Shapiro and Jason Whitlock and let me know your thoughts.

Posted by all3 on 6/26/2018 11:09:00 AM (view original):
Another day, another b_l embarrassment. Some things just never get old.
I'm so glad he's finally over his depression of Mike leaving; things were far too sensible without him for a while.

Like clockwork.

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 11:20:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/26/2018 11:16:00 AM (view original):
Wow. CCCP has gone insane. It's funny how he disregards me for wanting to change the electoral college, but now he argues against due process, a basic right in the constitution. Bonkers.

False equivalency yet again. Thanks for playing. When a perp shoots a police officer and he shoots back, is that due process? Y or N?

Answer. Because bad luck refuses to.

I'll give you some sage advice. You want to be a reporter. Listen to the Sunday podcast of Ben Shapiro and Jason Whitlock and let me know your thoughts.

Jesus, you listen to those two idiots? That explains a lot.

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding about how due process protects us and how it only works if it applies to everyone.

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 11:22:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 11:20:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/26/2018 11:16:00 AM (view original):
Wow. CCCP has gone insane. It's funny how he disregards me for wanting to change the electoral college, but now he argues against due process, a basic right in the constitution. Bonkers.

False equivalency yet again. Thanks for playing. When a perp shoots a police officer and he shoots back, is that due process? Y or N?

Answer. Because bad luck refuses to.

I'll give you some sage advice. You want to be a reporter. Listen to the Sunday podcast of Ben Shapiro and Jason Whitlock and let me know your thoughts.

Jesus, you listen to those two idiots? That explains a lot.

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding about how due process protects us and how it only works if it applies to everyone.

At least I answer questions. And I am pretty sure Ben Shapiro, a Harvard Law School graduate would take your definition of him as an "idiot" with a grain of salt.

The difference between us bad luck, aside from me being tougher than you and a better parent, is that I do understand where you are coming from and while I disagree, I get it. You refuse to see where I am coming from whatsoever. You are obtuse. You give zero deference to people who disagree with you. If you want to see a true idiot, just look in the mirror.

But let's have TP listen to the podcast and see what he says. Fair?

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 11:26:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 11:22:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 11:20:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/26/2018 11:16:00 AM (view original):
Wow. CCCP has gone insane. It's funny how he disregards me for wanting to change the electoral college, but now he argues against due process, a basic right in the constitution. Bonkers.

False equivalency yet again. Thanks for playing. When a perp shoots a police officer and he shoots back, is that due process? Y or N?

Answer. Because bad luck refuses to.

I'll give you some sage advice. You want to be a reporter. Listen to the Sunday podcast of Ben Shapiro and Jason Whitlock and let me know your thoughts.

Jesus, you listen to those two idiots? That explains a lot.

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding about how due process protects us and how it only works if it applies to everyone.

At least I answer questions. And I am pretty sure Ben Shapiro, a Harvard Law School graduate would take your definition of him as an "idiot" with a grain of salt.

The difference between us bad luck, aside from me being tougher than you and a better parent, is that I do understand where you are coming from and while I disagree, I get it. You refuse to see where I am coming from whatsoever. You are obtuse. You give zero deference to people who disagree with you. If you want to see a true idiot, just look in the mirror.

But let's have TP listen to the podcast and see what he says. Fair?

I don't think I've skipped any of your questions.

Not sure what makes you think you're tougher and a better parent (weird) but whatever.

I don't think you actually do understand "where I'm coming from" on this issue. You keep saying things like, "we can waive due process for people that are obviously illegal." That's a pretty big clue that you don't really understand the issue at all, which is a prerequisite for understanding where I'm coming from.

It's not about me giving zero deference to people who disagree with me, I give zero deference to people who continue to argue about something when they are clearly ignorant and incapable of grasping even the most basic issues at hand.

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 11:20:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/26/2018 11:16:00 AM (view original):
Wow. CCCP has gone insane. It's funny how he disregards me for wanting to change the electoral college, but now he argues against due process, a basic right in the constitution. Bonkers.

False equivalency yet again. Thanks for playing. When a perp shoots a police officer and he shoots back, is that due process? Y or N?

Answer. Because bad luck refuses to.

I'll give you some sage advice. You want to be a reporter. Listen to the Sunday podcast of Ben Shapiro and Jason Whitlock and let me know your thoughts.

How is that false equivalency? Both due process and the electoral college are core elements of our republic. To answer your question, no, that is not due process, that is a strawman.

To correct you, I AM a reporter, but I still like hearing differing perspectives. Give me a link to the podcast. IDK what Jason Whitlock has to do with it.

I just wish you would balance out Shapiro with something else in your ear. You are far too one sided and naive on this issue.

I'll use capital letters.

IF A PERP SHOOTS AT A POLICE OFFICER AND THE OFFICER SHOOTS BACK AND KILLS HIM, IS THAT DUE PROCESS?

To answer your questions:

#1) I am tougher than you because I can gauge by your rhetoric that you are fairly weak minded. Fact that you laud your athletic skills aka Al Bundy, I played high school football is laughable.

#2) I am a better parent because I don't teach my kids drivel such as white privilege and institutional racism. I teach them to treat each person and situation on an individual basis and don't ever bring home a freaking Yankees fan.

#3) I believe we need changes on the border. You don't. But then you complain about how the illegals are treated. Is that not the definition of "idiot"? I never said my suggestions were not radical. I said they were logical.

You are like the ACLU. You would rather live to the letter of the law and see a million people die than use logic and save them.

I will go along with your strawman.

Constitutionally, "police officers are allowed to shoot under two circumstances," says criminologist David Klinger of the University of Missouri St. Louis. The first circumstance is "to protect their life or the life of another innocent party" — what departments call the "defense-of-life" standard. The second circumstance is to prevent a suspect from escaping, but only if the officer has probable cause to think the suspect poses a dangerous threat to others.

If police were allowed to shoot willy-nilly, this would be a point for you. But they are only allowed to shoot if someone kills or threatens to kill right in front of them.

https://www.vox.com/2014/8/13/5994305/michael-brown-case-investigation-legal-police-kill-force-murder

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 11:38:00 AM (view original):
I'll use capital letters.

IF A PERP SHOOTS AT A POLICE OFFICER AND THE OFFICER SHOOTS BACK AND KILLS HIM, IS THAT DUE PROCESS?

To answer your questions:

#1) I am tougher than you because I can gauge by your rhetoric that you are fairly weak minded. Fact that you laud your athletic skills aka Al Bundy, I played high school football is laughable.

#2) I am a better parent because I don't teach my kids drivel such as white privilege and institutional racism. I teach them to treat each person and situation on an individual basis and don't ever bring home a freaking Yankees fan.

#3) I believe we need changes on the border. You don't. But then you complain about how the illegals are treated. Is that not the definition of "idiot"? I never said my suggestions were not radical. I said they were logical.

You are like the ACLU. You would rather live to the letter of the law and see a million people die than use logic and save them.

No, that's self defense. The police officer has a right to defend his own life, he isn't administratively waiving due process.

1) Weird.
2) Like how you hope they marry someone of the same race?
3) Wanting changes at the border doesn't require waiving due process.

Posted by bad_luck on 6/26/2018 11:22:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 11:20:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/26/2018 11:16:00 AM (view original):
Wow. CCCP has gone insane. It's funny how he disregards me for wanting to change the electoral college, but now he argues against due process, a basic right in the constitution. Bonkers.

False equivalency yet again. Thanks for playing. When a perp shoots a police officer and he shoots back, is that due process? Y or N?

Answer. Because bad luck refuses to.

I'll give you some sage advice. You want to be a reporter. Listen to the Sunday podcast of Ben Shapiro and Jason Whitlock and let me know your thoughts.

Jesus, you listen to those two idiots? That explains a lot.

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding about how due process protects us and how it only works if it applies to everyone.

The person who doesn't think chasing and apprehending the "alleged" criminal is part of the process keeps claiming someone else doesn't understand it.
Absolutely priceless. They're so cute when they're at that stupidity level.

Posted by tangplay on 6/26/2018 11:36:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 6/26/2018 11:20:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 6/26/2018 11:16:00 AM (view original):
Wow. CCCP has gone insane. It's funny how he disregards me for wanting to change the electoral college, but now he argues against due process, a basic right in the constitution. Bonkers.

False equivalency yet again. Thanks for playing. When a perp shoots a police officer and he shoots back, is that due process? Y or N?

Answer. Because bad luck refuses to.

I'll give you some sage advice. You want to be a reporter. Listen to the Sunday podcast of Ben Shapiro and Jason Whitlock and let me know your thoughts.

How is that false equivalency? Both due process and the electoral college are core elements of our republic. To answer your question, no, that is not due process, that is a strawman.

To correct you, I AM a reporter, but I still like hearing differing perspectives. Give me a link to the podcast. IDK what Jason Whitlock has to do with it.

I just wish you would balance out Shapiro with something else in your ear. You are far too one sided and naive on this issue.

#1) False equivalency because I don't want to eliminate due process. I want to give the border patrol more rights to implement it. Sort of how a police officer shoots back at a perp when they try to shoot you. They don't ask for permission they make a call.

#2) https://www.iheart.com/podcast/404-The-Ben-Shapiro-Show-28178102/episode/sunday-special-ep-7-jason-whitlock-29505607/

#3) I listen to ALL perspectives. I actually disagree with Ben on two major points. a) Gun Control b) His Pro Life thinking.

My point is if an illegal is caught red handed crossing the border then they should be sent back immediately.

It is a radical change but the current deterrents are not working. I am happy to hear your thoughts on what changes you would make if any. To me its pretty obvious that currently this is a costly nightmare.

Posted by tangplay on 6/26/2018 11:41:00 AM (view original):
I will go along with your strawman.

Constitutionally, "police officers are allowed to shoot under two circumstances," says criminologist David Klinger of the University of Missouri St. Louis. The first circumstance is "to protect their life or the life of another innocent party" — what departments call the "defense-of-life" standard. The second circumstance is to prevent a suspect from escaping, but only if the officer has probable cause to think the suspect poses a dangerous threat to others.

If police were allowed to shoot willy-nilly, this would be a point for you. But they are only allowed to shoot if someone kills or threatens to kill right in front of them.

https://www.vox.com/2014/8/13/5994305/michael-brown-case-investigation-legal-police-kill-force-murder

Yes. So if the border agent sees people cross right in front of them, why can't they send them back?

Explain.