Troll level: Dagga

My post was serious TAN.

So you're in favor of allowing public access to military tech, like anti-aircraft weapons, flamethrowers and RPGs? Because all of those would be used by "any army". That is the most insane thing I ever heard of.

If you want to stick to the argument that the 2nd Amendment needs updating, as mrford is saying, that's fine. Definitions of the amendments change and expand, that's reasonable.

But what you are saying is completely unreasonable. It's so ludicrous I actually thought you were intentionally trolling the thread.

TAN SAID I WAS REASONABLE

CLOSE THE THREAD AND GO HOME

http://www.cnn.com/...olice-shooting/index.html

You think the cops should have shot his legs?

Ignorance and sensationalism could spiral this out of control. Hopefully not.

This is a classic case of suicide by cop.

Is it just me or was the weather a bit warmer here in NYC during July? It's getting almost chilly at night here.

It's been pretty mild for summer here...
I happen to live about 15 miles from Ferguson.

The weather is mild down there as well? It's weird because it's supposed to be getting really hot here during August, but it's been pretty mild. July was scorching here.

All the moisture is keeping it mild but humid as fluff

Duh

It's starting to get humid here as well, probably because of all the rain we've been getting.

I'm talking about a bit bigger scale than that weather patterns have shifted creating droughts in the south west and above average rainfall on the east coast. Jet stream or the Pacific deep ocean current or some fluff homie. Pacific currents shifted, shifting the jet stream drawing moisture away from the south west and sacking extra gulf moisture up towards the east coast

Just a completely baseless hypothesis

To within reason, I was being specific to fire arms(=Gun). We both know what I was talking about.

But you weren't even arguing about what the 2nd Amendment meant until Pang brought it up. Before he brought it up, your argument was the right to defend yourself. You, fine sir, are being inconsistent.

And anyway, let's be honest here. If we're ever in a situation where someone manages to overpower the foremost military power in the world (annual budget is that of the next 10 or so countries COMBINED, including China and Russia), we're going to be so fluffed that whether you have a pistol or an AK-47 it won't even matter at that point. You'll probably have to sell your weapon to buy rations to take down with you into your nuclear bunker.

I was addressing Pang's point...

Well, fair enough, but see above. If you, as an American, ever need an M-16 because the US military has failed, you're fluffed anyway. You're better off with a muffled hunting rifle and move out into the woods to live as best you can without attracting attention.

We've also gotten to the point where our own military is so powerful that if it took over via coup, there's nothing we could do to stop it, even if we all had AKs. However powerful you think the American military is, you're wrong. It's even more powerful.

Bombay is absolutely correct about the intent of the second amendment. You don't have to do much reading to discover what the founders had in mind. Just like freedom of speech and the press applies to the internet, the Supreme Court found in the heller case that the march of technology has no bearing on the right to bear arms.

When did it become radical to want to follow the us constitution in the us?

Because the 2nd Amendment has come to mean something else, and it was written at the time when militias rising up could actually DO something about tyranny or occupation.

Do you really think if the American military - Navy/Marines, Army, Air Force + National Guard - took over the government, you having a few extra guns would do anything to stop it?

I appreciate your commitment and patriotism, but I think you're a little misguided if you think that American citizenry could actually *stop* the US military from doing what it wanted.

In other words, the 2nd Amendment as it was intended, in my opinion, is fairly obsolete. I think that mrford has a better argument - it needs to be updated to reflect the culture of weaponry (I think that's what mrford was implying, at least), not the *need* to have it just in case there's an invasion.

There's literally nothing you can do if we get invaded (mind you, by a force so powerful it could defeat the most powerful military the world has ever seen) or if the military turns its weapons inwards.

I mean you could still organize a guerrilla resistance and stuff, but having a few more weapons ultimately isn't going to change things anyway. Besides, automatic weapons are legal in some states anyway already, so I guess the point is moot depending on where you live.

Once again, we're talking about hypotheticals here, but it's important in this case because we're talking about 2nd Amendment what-ifs.

If I had a spare $15,000 - $30,000 I could get a transferable auto

I don't have a spare $30,000. They are prohibitively expensive to all but militias and people with spending money really.

I didn't know we had so many from the St Louis area here... I live pretty close too!
But here is the deal, Ferguson (in the heart of North County) isn't the most ideal town anyway, I hear of a shooting there it seems like once a week, drive by's etc... The police force are bound to be leery of dealing with ANYONE, white black gay or straight, but i digress. Mr Brown put himself into a situation to put his life on the line, you all seen the video of him acting like a tough guy to the store clerk he had just robbed, maybe he thought he could punk the cop just as easy since he had no backup on the scene. Either way, these idiots rioting and looting are fluffing stupid, "hey lets trash our own fluff because someone else made a mistake" Peaceful protestors are one thing but the looting idiots are another, they all need to take a few rubber bullets, maybe they might start to think twice.

Tan, the afghanis have been holding off overwhelmingly superior militaries (is that the correct plural?) for a looooooooooong time.

"Mr Brown put himself into a situation"

You don't know this. I don't know this. We can all stop acting like we know the facts now. The cop and an anonymous TV show call-in named Josie gave the policeman's story (how she knew that Wilson thought Brown was on drugs is beyond me unless she personally has talked to him or an associate, which means she has an emotional investment and is thus inherently biased). Their version of events was that after the policeman rolled his window down and confronted Brown, Brown attacked the police officer and lunged for his weapon. The weapon was discharged once inside the car. Brown then fled but when confronted again by the officer on foot, Brown charged the police officer. The police officer opened fire, killing Brown.

The other witnesses including his friend say that Wilson rolled his window down and confronted them, left, then reversed back up to them. Witnesses allege that Wilson grabbed his neck and tried to pull him in - witnesses say they say Brown's hand on the door as if he was trying to push away. Brown lunged for the firearm as Wilson was unholstering it. The weapon was discharged once in the car. Witnesses say Brown and his friend fled, but the policeman opened fire, hitting Brown once. Brown stopped and allegedly yelled don't shoot. Wilson allegedly opened fire and hit Brown a total of six times, including two headshots.

Who is telling the truth? We don't know yet. There are both sides of the story. But cut the horsefluff with the "He put himself in that situation."

How the hell do you know? Were you there? If even the cops don't know, how do you?

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/...ncounter-with-mike-brown/

Not familiar with this site but all claims linked to sources.

Stop it. They don't know what happened either. You don't know what happened. I don't know what happened.

ffs how do you even know that's Wilson's x-ray? Because a website told you so? How do you know Brown wasn't punching him back in self-defense?

You don't know.

btw, that website? It's not even a news site. It's a blog. By a right-winger. In the about section:

"Today The Gateway Pundit is a leading right-of-center news website."

Just admit you don't know all the facts and stop trying to prove you do, because you don't.

I never claimed to. I just posted a relevant link. I don't think I have posted anything here directly related to "the facts" prior to what appears to be a relevant link.

Although, the St. Louis paper has a lot of witnesses who back the cop. So although I might not know all the facts, enough is out there to start drawing conclusions. In reality, we probably never have *all* of the facts about anything ever.

That St. Louis media outlet is citing the police, who are saying they have "dozens" of witnesses that back up Wilson's story...

Unless this has been updated with actual interviews. Has it? Do you have a link?

in what world can you punch a cop in self defense?

If *you* fear for *your* life. It might not be legal, but when you're frightened, you'll do what you can to survive.

I'm not saying this is what happened. I am simply saying that it could have happened. In other words, we don't know what happened.

well we have a very good idea of what happened, including an account of a witness unknowingly telling what he saw on video that falls in line with what the cop claimed to have happened.

Has the AT court made judgement yet?

And there's a bunch of other witnesses that say the opposite of what he said who were also present at the scene. This witness is now right and everyone else is wrong? Could be, but how do you know that? Why aren't the other witnesses right and this guy wrong?

There comes a point where you need to stop trying to prove what you believe, and just let the facts speak for themselves. As of now, with two opposing narratives and no way to know who is telling to truth AT THE MOMENT, it's premature to say you have a "good idea" of what happened. You *think* you know what happened, but you don't know.

He put himself in that situation the moment he decided to blatantly break the law and then engage the cop in a hand to hand struggle. That is not a variance in the stories.

mrford, you do realize that Wilson confronting Brown had NOTHING to do with the robbery, right? Wilson didn't even know it happened. So why are you bringing up the robbery? To smear this petty thief as a guy who will do anything to escape justice?

And did you bother reading what I posted up before? There are some witnesses who say the policeman starting the physical altercation and Brown was trying to get away. There are other witnesses who say the opposite - Brown started the physical altercation.

What we do know for sure is that we don't know anything for sure yet.

i wasnt referring to the robbery, although after the fact it does point to character.

the reason the cop stopped in the first place was these 2 were walking down the middle of the road impeding traffic. not only illegal but stupid. that was a choice as well. he could just as easily been hit by a car and killed.

once again going to pattern of behavior. so yes, lets ignore the fight and the shooting. pattern of behavior based on the facts we DO have and it aint looking good for your boy.


i am not ready to say he is guilty, but rioting and saying he was executed? seriously?

Sooooo....what does that have to do with the cop potentially starting the physical altercation? Some accounts say the cop started it. So what if the cop actually did start it? It's still Brown's fault? No matter what, that cop had no option but to kill that jaywalking thief, even if the cop is the one who started it? Is that what you're saying, because if that isn't what you're saying, and your answer is, "well if the cop actually did start it, then I could be wrong", then congratulations, welcome to WE DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED YET, the game show where we literally don't know what happened yet!

the governor aint called me yet, but im available to restore peace

http://i.imgur.com/pHSwzqU.gif

when i hear hoof beats i think horses not zebras. i sure as fluff dont go start riots because it might be a zebra.

there wouldnt of been a confrontation if he wasnt breaking the law to start with. period. he put himself to be in a confrontation with a police officer in a town with racial tensions and a low quality of life.

no one is saying he deserved to be killed, but he made a series of bad decisions that day. assuming he continued that trend is a lot more likely than he was executed by a cop in front of witnesses.

So let me get this straight:

It was Brown's fault if the policeman started beating his ass for no reason.

Is that what you are saying? You really can't admit that the policeman might be at fault, can you?

And really, ford? He stole cigars and jaywalked. You've done 50% of that on a regular basis. And you've never walked in the middle of the road before when there aren't any cars around in the middle of the night? To that, I call you a liar.

So there, you've already done 50% of what he did that night. So you're halfway already to that slippery slop of copkilling, bestial incest and recidivism, because we all know that's where his actions led.

How about this? If you're a cop, DON'T ABUSE YOUR fluffING POWER. Does that sound fair to you? Is that too much to ask of the police?

sorry, i edited

i keep coming up with fluff to say and dont feel like making 3 posts in a row.

you know what, there is a 10 minute break between posts damnit..........

i never said there was no possible way the cop was at fault. every statement i made said it is far more likely that the officer's account is true based on the facts we do have, and that the riots and the like are tarded.

this situation would of never happened if the law wasnt being broken. this is a separate but related point.

you are using the same kind of sensationalism the family of the victim has been using. You say i have already decided the officer's fate, yet the family regularly releases statements, through a lawyer that worked on the tavon martin, about their son's "execution" this is borderline inciting riots

but it keeps going! they hired a medical examiner that worked on the OJ case to do an independent investigation, so he can get his opinion out there before an official report. This goes so far unprofessionally to say that it COULD mean that he was on his knees surrendering, but we dont know. what the fluff is that? that is courtroom misleading word battle. In the middle of riots.

this situation has been handled poorly by all parties, but you cant honestly sit there and think this cop executed this criminal.

goddamnit ford how did you suck me into another one of these stupid arguments? i resolved to myself not to bother anymore with the Wilson/Brown arguments here - i thought we moved on to the 2nd amendment debate. :(

i dont remember if you started it back up or me!

but i have already made my 2nd amendment views clear, i needed something to ramble on about.

No, what I am trying to tell you is that despite what you think, you don't *know* for sure what happened. And neither do I. Details are still being released, the puzzle is still being put together. Some witnesses say this, other witnesses say that. For god's sake Wilson hasn't even officially made a statement yet on what happened. We only have sources of sources of sources saying he said/she said. Basically we don't know 100% what happened yet, so what are we even arguing about???

you know ford i was actually backing you up on the 2nd Amendment debate...well kind of. I actually think we need tighter gun control laws. BUT if I were going to argue the opposite, I would argue what you're arguing.

you think the cop should have kneecapped the fat dude?

i dont know what you mean by tighter gun control laws. like restrictions to types of guns? restrictions to who can have guns?

i don't know what i think, i'm waiting for more information. you should too before coming to a conclusion. maybe what you think happened actually happened. maybe not. we'll see. but for now, it's not certain that what you purported happened actually happened, but it could have happened. we need more info. capice?