Chandemonium
-
Posts
1,275 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Chandemonium
-
-
On 7/26/2020 at 12:23 PM, BillStime said:
MAGA BIBLE
Cool. While we’re leaving our personal safety up to God, let’s also get rid of home security alarm systems, front doors that lock, smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, seat belts, air bags, bike helmets, and modern medicine.
-
2
-
-
42 minutes ago, Just Joshin' said:
You really don't understand? So I can assume you do not run of own a business.
They have the right to peacefully protest in their own time. The business has the right to fire them. It all works out.
That’s what I said. The law should allow them to miss work to protest if they want. The law should also allow them to be fired for missing work to protest.
-
1
-
-
16 hours ago, keepthefaith said:
This will be an interesting case to watch. Sort of a clash between 1st and 2nd amendment rights. Where the lines should be drawn will be contested if it goes to trial.
So is that even legal? You can walk off the job and protest matters not necessarily related to your job?
I don’t see why it shouldn’t be legal. I also don’t see why it shouldn’t be legal to fire their asses for it. -
7 hours ago, CarpetCrawler said:
That reporter was obviously not wearing proper ear protection. If you wear plugs under the protectors (like any reputable range would have you do) you barely hear it.
An AK-47 has a bit of a jolt, AR-15's are nothing, and really a lot of fun at a range. If you ever see a Groupon for a local range, go.
Or he was lying to push a narrative, and/or is the world’s biggest sissy. .223 is arguably the easiest centerfire rifle round to shoot as far as being approachable to new shooters (low noise, low recoil, low cost, availability at least in normal times etc.) that’s what makes it so popular.
-
1
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Winston Zeddemore said:
Quick, someone tell these people about their white privilege, clearly they haven't been told and that's why they're living on the streets in absolute squalor in the country's second biggest (and one of the most affluent) cities.
The guy in the bottom picture has a nicer office chair than I do at my desk at work. Must be his white privelege.
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, Kevbeau said:
These people are pretenders. There’s plenty of videos where you can see what they’re carrying and how they are carrying. This is stupid regardless of what political affiliation you choose. Push enough of this garbage and eventually it will escalate to people who know what they’re doing getting involved.
EDIT:
I am very pro 2A, but feel the same way about the Michigan open carry demonstrations. A gun should be the last option when everything else is exhausted.
The Michigan protests are an interesting parallel. Even before George Floyd was killed some leftist Facebook friends of mine were posting CNN links to stories about them and captioning them with things like ‘imagine if they were black,’ with the implication that they would’ve been murdered by the police simply for being armed in public, or at least forcefully dispersed by riot squads. They scoffed at the notion that perhaps the reason they weren’t forcefully dispersed wasn’t due to their skin color, but rather because they clearly possessed the means to shoot back. It looks like they now have their answer to the ‘what if they were black?’ question. I wonder if they will reassess their position in light of this evidence, but I’m not holding my breath.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, B-Man said:
So uterus is too gendered to use, but we’re supposed to call menstrual periods uterine bleeding? Makes perfect sense. Couldn’t even get to the bottom of their own list before they out-woke themselves.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Any 10mm fans here? Been thinking about picking one (or 2) up as a hunting sidearm.
-
Was Warren actually banned for starting this thread? He hasn’t posted since.
-
50 minutes ago, B-Man said:
Dr. Who did try to warn us about the Weeping Angels.
-
9 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:
What degree of responsibility do you place on the true protesters for not weeding out the bad apples that damage and loot? If the vast majority of people gathering and/or marching in the form of a protest are innocent and peaceful then one would think that they could easily control the rioters.
If the protesters want to say all cops are bad because the truly bad ones aren’t immediately identified and weeded out, the same standard should apply to them. #allprotestersarerioters
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, Unforgiven said:
Should find another outspoken republican entertainer. That seems to send the idiots into a frenzy.
Tucker Carlson
-
1
-
3
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:
A new national Ipsos/Reuters poll finds that former Vice President Joe Biden leads President Donald Trump 48% to 35%.
While Biden has led Trump in almost every Ipsos poll this year, his advantage this week is the largest in 2020.
What's the point: Even though the national polls were accurate in 2016, one of the complaints I hear most often about the polls is that Trump's supporters are either lying or won't talk to pollsters. Polls like Ipsos get around that argument because they use machines (e.g. they're done online) to conduct the interviews. There's no reason to lie to a machine. If Trump was doing significantly better in these non-live interview polls, then these critics of the polls may have a point.
...
There's no indication over the last month in the non-live interview polls that Trump supporters last month are merely saying that they are "undecided" right now.
Nor is there any reason to think that the surveys are shifting because Democrats are more likely to answer polls these days. Many of these non-live interview pollsters weight by party identification, so they're less susceptible to fewer Republicans responding than have over the long term (like when the race for president was closer).
I also checked out the state polling done since the protests began. Averaging the non-live interview polls just like I did for the national polls, I found on average that Biden's margin was 9 points bigger than Hillary Clinton's was. A 9-point shift in Biden's direction nationally from 2016 would give him an 11-point lead nationally, which is around where the national polls have the race.
Good point. No one’s ever had their information stolen off the internet and used against them before.
-
On 6/19/2020 at 2:43 PM, Deranged Rhino said:
WTF is all over his back?
-
5 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:
Ol’ Raz ain’t getting much sympathy in the replies to his tweet.
25 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:
My brother in law has lived in Seattle for several years. He has always said Seattle seems to be trying to be the new San Francisco. Looks like they’ve surpassed SF big time.It’s too bad. My experience with Seattle consists of a 4 day stay 12 years ago so I’m hardly an expert, but at the time it seemed like a really cool city.
-
8 hours ago, first_and_ten said:
What kind of a comment is it's "good vs evil" > You sound just as divisive as the guy you support. And I find it funny you say he loves his country. Honestly he couldn't care less about you or anyone else in this country. If he cared about his followers, he would jam them all into a huge auditorium and risk their lives for an ego boost. And if you really believe that over 1 million people requested tickets, I have some swamp land I'd like to sell you. The guy lies like it's breathing.
When he got elected, I said I want to give him a chance. Was I wrong or what? Literally the most corrupt president in modern times. He's so desperate that he has to go to other countries to get help to get reelected, This being against the law mind you.
The Donald Trump experiment will end this November. A colossal failure, and will go down in the history books as a corrupt dictator wanna be. He's a pathetic human being and a totally corrupt president. We will have a president that will hopefully try to unit the country that Donald Trump spent dividing. Your divisive comment just proves my point. It shouldn't be "us against them". This is The UNITED States of America. When you say we are not, you're going against what our forefathers fought for.
You’re right about one thing. Creepy Joe will definitely try to unit the country if he wins. If he does, we’ll all be ****ed.
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, CarpetCrawler said:
It looks to me like he's flicking a booger.
(oh no, am I going to lose my job for saying booger??)
Only if your name is Lou. You definitely don’t want to be accused of being booger Lou these days.
-
2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:
Calling all black people in the south "dumb as hell" is White Liberal Bingo.
Keep proving you are what you say you are: a progressive fascist who's too dumb to understand he's being used as a useless idiot.
Can we pin this response to show the world that Penfield45 is a vile racist POS?
Blatant racism aside, I can’t get over the fact that he comes here crapping all over Trump and Trump supporters as his shtick, then comes out and admits that He thinks you’d have to be stupid to vote for Biden.
-
1
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:
This guy even has "cult leader" in his bio
This is the warped/deranged cult
"Everyone say Black Lives Matter! It totally has nothing to do with any political affiliation and BLM isn't communist come on now!"
Oh.
Why are they trying to cancel Taco Bell?
-
2 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:
The 4 minute video is just as horrible. At the 2 minute mark, he's surrounded and knocked out. The person filming never stops filming the incident. I have no idea if anyone called the police.
I disagree. I thought the last half of the full video was lovely. Glad the POS got his.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, GregPersons said:
This is why I feel like we're close. The cops are the ones in possession of the view of the larger picture; he is the confused person, he is firing out of fear and desperation. They have the protective gear — shields, helmets, armor — and he has a civilian firearm, right? (I know they're serving a warrant. I'm saying theoretically as a solution, cops could be in more armor/have protection, without needing to have offensive firepower.)
We should be able to expect more from cops to prevent violence rather than excusing them for the violence they perpetuate. The idea that it could've been worse, or it's understandable from a certain point of view — imo that is all kinda unacceptable now. It's jut not good enough.
My honest feeling, and obviously I'm not alone on this, is that I question all of it. I question the use of deadly force in the biggest most general sense for police, and ask why? Why does it have to be that way? It's worked elsewhere with unarmed police just fine. Just what I've seen personally locally in LA County, I've yet to ever read a story about a police shooting that seemed absolutely necessary. I am struggling to conjure any example of a situation where the police didn't appear to instigate the situation toward violent ends. Idk.
We agree that this case shouldn’t have happened, but if you think the answer to preventing similar situations in the future is to disarm the police and then weigh them down in bulky armor, effectively making them sitting ducks then we couldn’t be further apart.
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, GregPersons said:
Sorry let me restate because I actually think we're closer on this than it sounds like
I'm saying if the police didn't have guns to begin with, the boyfriend does not open fire. Hold on.... hold on. I know. I know that seems like -- well if the criminal is armed, but the police aren't armed, why wouldn't he just murder them there? Because he doesn't want to die. Nobody wants to get into a shoot out with police. No rational person wants to murder police officers, knowing that they will not last long before being found. Shooting at police is a desperate last option, it is a suicide run. Because if you back somebody into a corner, they will attack back. This is a prime example of what is meant by "de-escalation" tactics being needed. Armed police - STOP OR I'LL SHOOT - this is not necessary for most people - and for desperate people with guns, like Breonna's boyfriend, it just makes them more desperate. Instead - PLEASE STOP AND LET ME HELP YOU - or something less aggressive and confrontational - that's what the goal ought to be.
This, by the way, I believe fully if Breonna isn't in the room. There's no reason for anybody to die here, no reason for any shots to be fired. That, additionally, an innocent bystander was in this situation should have meant everybody stopped. Even with her boyfriend firing first — again. This is where you de-escalate. You take cover. You use those riot shields, not on protestors, but here. I'm all for police having protective armor; I don't think there's a lot of value in them having guns. All the armor and no guns. Instead of cops having Punisher decals, maybe they can put up Batman ones. Cops can have bat ears and capes too if they'd like. But yeah, armor = cool. Lethal weapons = seems unnecessary 95% of the time, frankly. And when it is needed, have dedicated gun / sniper / swat specialists who can operate with precision and minimal loss of life. I don't want the "bad guys" to be killed by police ever; I want them to stand trial.
In another thread I mentioned I've been asking for examples of police using guns to save a life. As in, police used a gun to shoot and ideally wound or perhaps kill somebody in order to directly save a life that was in mortal danger, a life that would not have been saved otherwise. Not "this drug dealer would've gone on to kill someone in the future." The only example I've been provided is London Bridge terrorist attack; good example but alas not American. This almost might've been that case, right? Had Breonna's boyfriend, let's say, took her hostage — ideally the police then are able to save a life by shooting to disarm/wound/kill him before he harms her or anyone. Of course, that isn't what happened. And what I'm asking is, how many times has the good version happened? We hear a LOT about these bad ones. I'm led to believe by TV and frankly state propaganda that cops are saving lives on a regular basis in tangible ways like that. But, I can't find any stories of it. The stories I find when I search for "cops rescue" or "police rescue" are examples of cops helping people without using or needing guns.
It shouldn't have gotten to that point to begin with. One hundred percent agree. There's a lot of blame to go around. Policies like the war on drugs. And that we just accept cop shootouts as a fact of American life, and if drugs are involved, we're even moreso inclined to accept it as inevitable. It's all connected.
I think it’s a bold assumption to make that the boyfriend wouldn’t have opened fire if the police didn’t have guns. I’m not even sure he knew they had guns or if their guns were drawn when he opened fire. If you kick someone’s door in uninvited at 1am that action alone is enough for many people to believe you mean to do them grave harm and that deadly force is justified whether you as the burglar are armed or not, and there’s many jurisdictions in this country where the law agrees that deadly force is justified. I’m not sure what not wanting to murder police has to do with this case, since the reason the charges against the boyfriend were dropped and the reason I personally believe his actions are justified is precisely because he didn’t know they were police serving a warrant, so he treated them as the home invaders they appeared to be.
From the cops’ side, I certainly believe deescalation has its time and place, and should be taught to recruits and reinforced through career-long continuing education, but when you’re taking gunfire isn’t the time for “how can I help you?” At that point they need to address the deadly threat they’re facing in the way that ends it the quickest, which means shooting back.
-
9 minutes ago, GregPersons said:
And that justification is beyond weak, too. For drug packages, they needed guns? They were so jumpy they needed to fire at the first moving target they saw?
It's not just like one bad training program. It's a bad operating system.
If you’re suggesting that police shouldn’t carry guns when entering strange homes with suspected drug activity, I can’t agree there. They also didn’t fire at the first moving target they saw, Ms. Taylor’s boyfriend shot first and the police returned fire, which is why I said in my first post that given the circumstances I believe both Ms. Taylor’s boyfriend and the officers appear justified in their actions, tragic though the result is. My issue is the policy which allowed these circumstances to begin with.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, 4merper4mer said:
Are there any circumstances under which a no knock warrant would help bring a legitimate criminal to justice and avoid a cop getting shot through a door? My guess is yes, but it is possible I'm misunderstanding something.
If if the above is indeed correct then banning them altogether isn't the greatest idea I've ever heard. Clearly though, the standard to get one is far too low at least in Ms. Taylor's jurisdiction. It should be a very high standard to get that type of warrant. The policy in this incident was either subverted or it needs to be changed. If it was subverted, the people who subverted it....police, judge, whoever....need to be held to account.
To your first paragraph, while that may be the case, the risk of police getting shot through the door needs to be weighed against the risk inherent in a no-knock of a gunfight with an invidual who would otherwise not react violently if he did not believe his home was being broken into. Alternative tactics that minimize the risks of both being shot through the door or starting a shootout with someone who believes their home is being broken into by criminals, while still allowing the police to apprehend suspects and collect evidence should also be explored and considered.
As far as if policy was subverted in this particular case, I have seen mention of some peculiarities in how the warrant was obtained, but not enough for me to make the jump to believing intentional malfeasance without additional evidence. From what I understand, the warrant was based at least in part on Taylor’s ex-boyfriend, a suspected drug dealer, having had packages delivered to her address in his name. This was supposedly based on a tip from a postal worker, but since the incident no such person has confirmed that they were the informant. This seems odd to me, but even if it’s all true it seems like far to low of a standard to obtain a no knock warrant.
The Media's Portrayal of Trump and His Presidency
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
At least she didn’t go with “Pence punches disabled war hero”