Topic: USAmerifora: Do you know you have rights?
Anonymous A started this discussion 3 years ago #105,254
The constitution says you do.Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 23 minutes later[^] [v] #1,183,711
Good luck exercising them with US cops being homicidal thugs with badges.
shelly joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 30 minutes later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,716
shelly double-posted this 3 years ago, 20 seconds later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,717
what's the point.... if I can't cop check in Arizona may as well end it.... usa over
Dead !Pool..v42s joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,723
@1,183,716 (shelly)
@previous (shelly)
Wait what! That sucks, did they just pass a law or something? Statewide or up to local jurisdictions?
@previous (shelly)
Wait what! That sucks, did they just pass a law or something? Statewide or up to local jurisdictions?
boof joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 17 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,724
They made a wholly unnecessary law about recording within 8 feet, with exception for if there's interaction between you and them. Purportedly it's for keeping you out of their face while they try to do a job. Unnecessary because they can already tell you to stand back regardless if you have a camera or not.
shelly replied with this 3 years ago, 11 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,726
Dead !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 2 hours later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,736
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 19 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,737
Meta !Sober//iZs joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 7 hours later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,775
@1,183,711 (B)
> Good luck exercising them with US cops being homicidal thugs with badges.
Which rights have the US cops prevented you from exercising?
> Good luck exercising them with US cops being homicidal thugs with badges.
Which rights have the US cops prevented you from exercising?
Dead !Pool..v42s replied with this 3 years ago, 40 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,779
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 38 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,784
@1,183,711 (B)
> Good luck exercising them with US cops being homicidal thugs with badges.
What about thugs being homicidal by shooting at cops? Don't cops have the right to protect themselves by returning fire, or do they have to allow the thugs to shoot and kill them so they can have their "due process"?
> Good luck exercising them with US cops being homicidal thugs with badges.
What about thugs being homicidal by shooting at cops? Don't cops have the right to protect themselves by returning fire, or do they have to allow the thugs to shoot and kill them so they can have their "due process"?
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,793
@previous (H)
They can return fire, yes, depending on the circumstances. We are not talking about that. We are talking about shooting an unarmed black man 90 times at a routine traffic stop. Thanks.
They can return fire, yes, depending on the circumstances. We are not talking about that. We are talking about shooting an unarmed black man 90 times at a routine traffic stop. Thanks.
Anonymous H replied with this 3 years ago, 43 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,803
@previous (B)
He opened fire on them first.
Also, even if the shooting was justified, you would still make the criminal a victim of homicide by police. It's the lefts way of thinking.
He opened fire on them first.
Also, even if the shooting was justified, you would still make the criminal a victim of homicide by police. It's the lefts way of thinking.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 24 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,807
boof replied with this 3 years ago, 2 hours later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,813
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,841
@previous (boof)
If you listen to the Pro-Choice bitches, you would believe that in overturning R vs W,they made abortion Illegal.
This Was NOT The CASE!
Overturning R vs W simply removed abortion as a Constitutionally Protected Right under the NON-EXISTENT "Right To Privacy" provision that the Warren Court seems to have created out of thin air.
HOWEVER, SCOTUS simply removed R vs W as a right and turned the matter over to the State legislators just as the 10th amendment of the Bill Of Rights intended.
What SCOTUS Could have done, is put the matter under the 14th amendments "Equal Protection" clause, which COULD give full legal rights to the Unborn and make Abortion MURDER under federal law ie: Denying the victims Civil Rights by terminating his/her life.
Just as a side note, How is Late Term Abortion, say, in the 9th month of gestation any less a murder than killing the infant an hour or even a month after natural birth?
The Argument that the naturally born infant can live separate from the mother is obviously Nonsense since you could leave a month old baby in a room full of food or baby formula and and it would die in less than a week because it lacked the ability to feed itself or even
recognize Food or Water.
If you listen to the Pro-Choice bitches, you would believe that in overturning R vs W,they made abortion Illegal.
This Was NOT The CASE!
Overturning R vs W simply removed abortion as a Constitutionally Protected Right under the NON-EXISTENT "Right To Privacy" provision that the Warren Court seems to have created out of thin air.
HOWEVER, SCOTUS simply removed R vs W as a right and turned the matter over to the State legislators just as the 10th amendment of the Bill Of Rights intended.
What SCOTUS Could have done, is put the matter under the 14th amendments "Equal Protection" clause, which COULD give full legal rights to the Unborn and make Abortion MURDER under federal law ie: Denying the victims Civil Rights by terminating his/her life.
Just as a side note, How is Late Term Abortion, say, in the 9th month of gestation any less a murder than killing the infant an hour or even a month after natural birth?
The Argument that the naturally born infant can live separate from the mother is obviously Nonsense since you could leave a month old baby in a room full of food or baby formula and and it would die in less than a week because it lacked the ability to feed itself or even
recognize Food or Water.
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 42 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,856
@previous (I)
Why bring up late term abortion when they make up such a small percentage of births?
Most late term abortions are done by women who wanted to keep their children but something horrible happened to her or the child
Why bring up late term abortion when they make up such a small percentage of births?
Most late term abortions are done by women who wanted to keep their children but something horrible happened to her or the child
WSD !m2cp3rR5zw joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 15 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,955
We are born free son.
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,183,958
WSD !m2cp3rR5zw replied with this 3 years ago, 5 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,079
Anonymous B replied with this 3 years ago, 41 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,081
boof replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,184,095
@1,183,841 (I)
> If you listen to the Pro-Choice bitches, you would believe that in overturning R vs W,they made abortion Illegal.
> This Was NOT The CASE!
> Overturning R vs W simply removed abortion as a Constitutionally Protected Right under the NON-EXISTENT "Right To Privacy" provision that the Warren Court seems to have created out of thin air.
>
> HOWEVER, SCOTUS simply removed R vs W as a right and turned the matter over to the State legislators just as the 10th amendment of the Bill Of Rights intended.
>
> What SCOTUS Could have done, is put the matter under the 14th amendments "Equal Protection" clause, which COULD give full legal rights to the Unborn and make Abortion MURDER under federal law ie: Denying the victims Civil Rights by terminating his/her life.
>
> Just as a side note, How is Late Term Abortion, say, in the 9th month of gestation any less a murder than killing the infant an hour or even a month after natural birth?
> The Argument that the naturally born infant can live separate from the mother is obviously Nonsense since you could leave a month old baby in a room full of food or baby formula and and it would die in less than a week because it lacked the ability to feed itself or even
> recognize Food or Water.
I don't know
> If you listen to the Pro-Choice bitches, you would believe that in overturning R vs W,they made abortion Illegal.
> This Was NOT The CASE!
> Overturning R vs W simply removed abortion as a Constitutionally Protected Right under the NON-EXISTENT "Right To Privacy" provision that the Warren Court seems to have created out of thin air.
>
> HOWEVER, SCOTUS simply removed R vs W as a right and turned the matter over to the State legislators just as the 10th amendment of the Bill Of Rights intended.
>
> What SCOTUS Could have done, is put the matter under the 14th amendments "Equal Protection" clause, which COULD give full legal rights to the Unborn and make Abortion MURDER under federal law ie: Denying the victims Civil Rights by terminating his/her life.
>
> Just as a side note, How is Late Term Abortion, say, in the 9th month of gestation any less a murder than killing the infant an hour or even a month after natural birth?
> The Argument that the naturally born infant can live separate from the mother is obviously Nonsense since you could leave a month old baby in a room full of food or baby formula and and it would die in less than a week because it lacked the ability to feed itself or even
> recognize Food or Water.
I don't know