|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Dec 20, 2010 23:18:38 GMT -5
I am interested in hearing this.
|
|
|
Post by CtraK on Dec 21, 2010 10:05:39 GMT -5
However, the notion that being an Oath Keeper magically means that one won't violate someone's rights, or not being one makes it certain that one will violate civil rights, is utterly ridiculous. Also, AA's notions of what civil rights entail are also pretty ridiculous. Actually, I'll cut through all of this by asking: how do the Oathkeepers know that they're only following strictly constitutional orders unless, say, they all have PhDs in Constitutional Law? Aren't they essentially acting like a giant* Supreme Court, minus the legitimacy of Congressional appointments? * __________________? (this space provided for your own amusement)Also, I should stress that no, I don't think the UK is close to Nazi Germany, and worst-case scenario, I think it'd take a couple of decades for it to become as bad. Nonetheless, it has in the last couple of decades gone in an undesirable direction, which even this coalition ostensibly recognises and pretends to do something about (with the pledged removal of ID cards).
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Dec 21, 2010 10:26:38 GMT -5
I am interested in hearing this. i.e. Having the right to not be arrested if you commit non-violent crimes, having the right not to be wrestled to the ground or tazed if you're wielding a knife, but happen to be elderly/a teenager/whatever, etc.
|
|
|
Post by rookie on Dec 21, 2010 11:58:41 GMT -5
I am interested in hearing this. Ok, but please turn off your Irony Meter. And make sure you have a supply of Excedrin Migraine within reach. And it may be a good idea to put a large pillow on the nearest three desks and wear padded gloves to prevent head injuries.
|
|
|
Post by aboveathletics on Dec 21, 2010 21:32:12 GMT -5
I am interested in hearing this. My views mirror the Oath Keepers on this matter 1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people. 2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people 3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal. 4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state. 5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty. 6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps. 7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext. 8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control." 9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies. 10.We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances. It's a good list. If all cops abided by it, I would have zero problem with them.
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Dec 21, 2010 21:37:20 GMT -5
Oh because cops do the opposite of all of that, hm?
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Dec 21, 2010 21:48:00 GMT -5
I am interested in hearing this. My views mirror the Oath Keepers on this matter 1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people. There are many good reasons to disarm someone. Good thing 99% of cops don't do this. Even when they deserve it? Oh yeah, cops do this all the time... no they don't, you bleeding idiot. I wonder what they define as "invade and subjugate"? Oh, good thing 99% of American cops don't do any of this. This just smacks of xenophobia. Even if said items are evidence? That's stupid. This is far too open for interpretation. Riots are not peaceably assembling. Free speech doesn't mean what you think it means. And as 99% of them do, I fail to see what the issue is.
|
|
|
Post by aboveathletics on Dec 21, 2010 21:48:31 GMT -5
Oh because cops do the opposite of all of that, hm? They already do 1,2,4, and 10 all the time. The others will undoubtedly come soon.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Dec 21, 2010 21:51:51 GMT -5
Oh because cops do the opposite of all of that, hm? They already do 1,2,4, and 10 all the time. The others will undoubtedly come soon. No they don't, you bleeding idiot.
|
|
|
Post by impatiens on Dec 21, 2010 22:02:42 GMT -5
And amongst AA's many other epic fails... This a cop: This is a soldier: Soldiers are part of a national military force, under the orders of a central government. Cops are part of a local government, and the vast majority only operate in a city, a part of a city, or in a county, although there are state troopers. Given that cops are part of local government, they do not have the power to order the majority of the things mentioned. In conclusion
|
|
|
Post by John E on Dec 21, 2010 22:15:54 GMT -5
Oh because cops do the opposite of all of that, hm? They already do 1,2,4, and 10 all the time. 1) If by "disarm the american people" you mean, "forcefully disarming people who are using weapons to threaten or attack others," then yes, they do and they should. If on the other hand, you mean "systematically depriving law abiding, non-violent citizens of weapons they're not using to hurt or threaten anyone," then no, they're not. 2) As far as I'm aware, this is not happening (at least not much or systematically) at the local level. It's being done at the federal level (which is wrong and needs to stop), so for your average city or state cop this is not an issue. 4) Seriously? You think this happens "all the time"? It hasn't happened since the Civil War. 10) This is the only one on your short list that I think has any merit regarding police at the local level. P.S. I'm open to being corrected if anyone has credible evidence of these things happening "all the time." Ow! I hurt my eyes again. EDIT: Oops! Once again I forgot that AA isn't 'Merikan. My above responses refer to the U.S.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Dec 21, 2010 22:23:43 GMT -5
AA, what the hell. Why are you always yammering on about America? You'd think that since Canada is so much more socialistic, you'd have no end of things to whine about, but no, you have to keep going on about what happens in a country you don't even fucking live in. Technically, Canada IS a part of America, but not the Unites States of America. Besidethepoint.jpg
|
|
|
Post by aboveathletics on Dec 21, 2010 23:00:59 GMT -5
The things wrong with Canada are essentially the same things wrong with America, people are generally just more familiar with American examples.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Dec 21, 2010 23:24:17 GMT -5
The things wrong with Canada are essentially the same things wrong with America, people are generally just more familiar with American examples. Too bad most of the things that you say are wrong are nothing more than fiction.
|
|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Dec 22, 2010 0:20:38 GMT -5
Impatiens' cop looks like he's one of those cop strippers.
|
|