Jump to content

Police Shamelessly cite Terrorism in Patrolling Private Lots


Fingon

Recommended Posts

"Terrorism" has replaced "Think of the children" for the government's continued nanny state invasion into our lives

that may be correct. But are you willing to take the chance? How will it effects at people's tailgating experiences? Is it that big of a problem to keep an eye out for possible issues while also stopping 19 year olds from banging in the parking lots, or throwing their friends through flaming tables.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 335
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

well, I guess it all comes down to how you characterize "terrorism". Because as I said, I feel gang activity is a much larger issue in this country. I don't classify them as terrorism. Not even one teenie bit. I classify them as criminals. Drug dealers. Murderers. Gang members.

 

Regardless if my opinion is correct or not here, I classify terrorism (at least the kind im talking about) as Radical Islam. A war on freedom and western civilization as we know it.

 

Forget about the gangs for a minute...

 

 

Where do you classify the Colorado Planned Parenthood shooting? The Colorado Movie shooting? Sandy Hook? VA Tech? Binghamton 2009?

 

Mere "criminals"? Because that is 4 out of the 7 most deadliest public mass shootings in the 2000s.

 

Do they not count since they werent brown?

Edited by DrDareustein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Forget about the gangs for a minute...

 

 

Where do you classify the Colorado Planned Parenthood shooting? The Colorado Movie shooting? Sandy Hook? VA Tech? Binghamton 2009?

 

Mere "criminals"? Because that is 4 out of the 7 most deadliest public mass shootings in the 2000s.

 

Do they not count since they werent brown?

they were delusional psycho idiots with mental health problems. I do not consider these acts as terrorism.

 

But if we want to really get into the debate, and what the whole argument is all about... Armed policing of those locations could have stopped these attacks. Or at least minimized the tragic loss of life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

they were delusional psycho idiots with mental health problems. I do not consider these acts as terrorism.

 

But if we want to really get into the debate, and what the whole argument is all about... Armed policing of those locations could have stopped these attacks. Or at least minimized the tragic loss of life.

 

In other words, "because they arent brown". Ok then... :rolleyes:

 

And by "armed police" you mean like the 1 dead, and 4 injured in the Planned Parenthood shooting that didnt stop anything?

Edited by DrDareustein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless if my opinion is correct or not here, I classify terrorism (at least the kind im talking about) as Radical Islam. A war on freedom and western civilization as we know it.

 

It's funny, at least to me, that in order to combat this invisible enemy who's waging war on "freedom and western civilization", our government's response has been to strip away all the constitutional freedoms and protections which made the west the west in exchange for security.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It's funny, at least to me, that in order to combat this invisible enemy who's waging war on "freedom and western civilization", our government's response has been to strip away all the constitutional freedoms and protections which made the west the west in exchange for security.

 

When you put it like that, its almost like you are saying the terrorists won and we fell right into their trap by playing their game!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

In other words, "because they arent brown". Ok then... :rolleyes:

 

And by "armed police" you mean like the 1 dead, and 4 injured in the Planned Parenthood shooting that didnt stop anything?

or the 50 dead at Orlando. Or the 14 dead in San Bernadino, or the 12 in Aurora. No armed security.

 

I don't consider terrorism a racial issue. A white idiot can create terrorism. I consider terrorism as an act against our way of life. I consider Sandy Hook, Aurora, Columbine as idiots that couldn't function in society. They basically wanted to be different or wanted to be famous for what they did. They were not carried out in an act against government or freedom.

 

Meanwhile, Timothy McVeigh, the Boston Bombers, Orlando, and San Bernadino as crimes against religion, freedom, and a free way of life.

 

As far as the planned parenthood shooting, I don't know enough about it to comment.

 

It's funny, at least to me, that in order to combat this invisible enemy who's waging war on "freedom and western civilization", our government's response has been to strip away all the constitutional freedoms and protections which made the west the west in exchange for security.

i don't disagree with added security.

 

But no way in hell do I agree with it effecting individuals rights. There is a way to do both. For example, taking guns away from citizens is not the answer to help fight crime against criminals who generally obtain guns illegally.

 

And no, I'm not talking about every single instance. But I am talking about the "domestic terrorism" that others spoke of earlier. That I also agreed is a larger issue than global terrorism.

 

When you put it like that, its almost like you are saying the terrorists won and we fell right into their trap by playing their game!

unfortunately, we did. Well, the bleading hearts did. Or maybe the better way to say it is, the idiots did.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://bills.buffalonews.com/2016/06/22/orchard-park-board-discusses-proposal-for-police-access-to-private-parking-lots-on-game-days-at-stadium/

 

 

 

Bull ****, we all know the primary reason is that you don't want people destroying folding tables on youtube. It's pretty shameful that they would use the guise of terrorism to justify stopping people from breaking tables. No one was talking about this before a year ago. Let's go back a little bit and see what Mark Poloncarz had to say last season:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://wivb.com/2016/01/04/county-officials-react-to-bills-fan-behavior/

 

http://bills.buffalonews.com/2016/06/22/orchard-park-board-discusses-proposal-for-police-access-to-private-parking-lots-on-game-days-at-stadium/

 

 

 

Bull ****, we all know the primary reason is that you don't want people destroying folding tables on youtube. It's pretty shameful that they would use the guise of terrorism to justify stopping people from breaking tables. No one was talking about this before a year ago. Let's go back a little bit and see what Mark Poloncarz had to say last season:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://wivb.com/2016/01/04/county-officials-react-to-bills-fan-behavior/

But they would NEVER use the guise of terrorism to keep a person from owning a gun.........Sarcasm meter should be pinging right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to say I've spent a lot of time in various public and private lots prior to Bills games and never once have I seen anybody thrown into a table. The craziest things I saw last year were a guy in a gorilla suit and two dudes running around, one giving the other a piggy back ride.

 

Whether it's a response to enemies either foreign or domestic, I think it's an overreaction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

unfortunately, we did. Well, the bleading hearts did. Or maybe the better way to say it is, the idiots did.

 

HAHAHAHA... dude... this is sad and hilarious.

 

I forgot about those bleeding hearts like Sensenbrenner, DeLay, Rumsfield, Cheney, and Bush that pushed that Patriot Act through... :rolleyes:

 

But as long as you have someone on the "opposite side" to blame and call names...

 

(hint: there are no opposite sides. in any of this. the closest post youve made to reality was when you started talking about the mentally unstable.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

HAHAHAHA... dude... this is sad and hilarious.

 

I forgot about those bleeding hearts like Sensenbrenner, DeLay, Rumsfield, Cheney, and Bush that pushed that Patriot Act through... :rolleyes:

 

But as long as you have someone on the "opposite side" to blame and call names...

 

(hint: there are no opposite sides. in any of this. the closest post youve made to reality was when you started talking about the mentally unstable.)

really? I just acknowledged your take on how stupid we have been as a whole in letting the terrorists win and your gonna go this route?

 

The only thing we actually disagree on is our opinions of what terrorism is. Where you consider crime by local gangs and other things as in the same boat as mass shootings by people on no fly lists.

 

Well, that and you may be a Hillary supporter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

really? I just acknowledged your take on how stupid we have been as a whole in letting the terrorists win and your gonna go this route?

 

The only thing we actually disagree on is our opinions of what terrorism is. Where you consider crime by local gangs and other things as in the same boat as mass shootings by people on no fly lists.

 

Well, that and you may be a Hillary supporter.

 

Name calling the "opposite side" so you can dismiss them again. And no Im not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once upon a time...

 

I was 7 years old at a private lot, where I saw a grown adult male laying on the ground choking on his vomit. I had to get another intoxicated fan to save him.

 

I helped save his life, a 7 year old.

I wonder if he sat on his nuts on the way down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Name calling the "opposite side" so you can dismiss them again. And no Im not.

again. No name calling. I was simply stating my thoughts on your political backing. Apparently I was wrong. I Don't Know how I'll ever live with myself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say that one's opinion of this is an ink blot test of your view of the police. If you think that the police are a nuisance at best and racial profiling, harassers at worst then you probably see this as another opportunity for them to shaft you. If you see the police as helping to maintain a calm, safe and family oriented environment then you are probably OK with them walking through your lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say that one's opinion of this is an ink blot test of your view of the police. If you think that the police are a nuisance at best and racial profiling, harassers at worst then you probably see this as another opportunity for them to shaft you. If you see the police as helping to maintain a calm, safe and family oriented environment then you are probably OK with them walking through your lot.

perfectly said. Another way is, if your not breaking the law and smoking blunts or doing other illegal activities, why should you care?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...