AlBUNDY4TDS Posted September 14 Posted September 14 39 minutes ago, Bill51390 said: Who’s yall? If you think I’m some liberal, you’re completely off on that. Yall as in the people trying to make this a big deal. Glad I could help. 1 1 1
Udubalum07 Posted September 14 Posted September 14 I mostly lean right, but this is grounds for termination. This is a terrible and indefensible. 1
B-Man Posted September 14 Posted September 14 1 hour ago, thenorthremembers said: Amazingly stupid comment. Regardless of the frame of reference, the comment is idiotic. Sorry, but you can't hold the values of Christian Conservatism, be anti-abortion, and then call for homeless people to be euthanized. It aligns to closely with the rhetoric of death pods. Stupid. Exactly right.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted September 14 Posted September 14 3 hours ago, Orlando Buffalo said: The conversation was about the violent homeless who are terrorizing neighborhoods. I disagree with Kilmeade anyways but your intentionally lying about what he was referencing is just trolling you claimed the quote never happened and now you're an expert. you're a joke.
BillsFanNC Posted September 14 Posted September 14 Dumb of course. It's pretty clear in context of the larger convo that he was talking about monsters who murder innocents, but you still need to be crystal clear. If he had made the exact same statement and then followed with an explicit qualifier clearly stating he's speaking of repeat offenders who end up murdering then this still would have gone viral. The last part would have just been edited out ala the fine people hoax. Ten years ago I'd say that issuing the apology is absolutely the right thing to do. Now...maybe not. You can't give these demons an inch. Even when you actually say something stupid. 2 1
Orlando Buffalo Posted September 14 Posted September 14 18 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: you claimed the quote never happened and now you're an expert. you're a joke. Where did I claim it never happened? 1
Buffarukus Posted September 14 Posted September 14 That was incredibly stupid thing to just blurt out. The irony is that the same people who will be using this to fuel rage as "what they all really think" are the same ones that advocated for the decriminalization of hard drug markets to go along with open boarders policies ⁸for mass fentanyl distribution.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted September 15 Posted September 15 21 hours ago, Orlando Buffalo said: Where did I claim it never happened? "Could you give the whole quote, because I can't find anyone who claims what you are claiming. It is almost as if you are simply lying. But I am sure as a liberal facts are important to you." shameless...
Orlando Buffalo Posted September 15 Posted September 15 7 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: "Could you give the whole quote, because I can't find anyone who claims what you are claiming. It is almost as if you are simply lying. But I am sure as a liberal facts are important to you." shameless... "Brian Kilmeade said that homeless people should get involuntary lethal injections. They should be killed" This is what the OP initially said, which is not what Kilmeade said, he said certain violent criminal homeless people should be given the death sentence. The fact that you guys lie about what is said after your lies cost Charlie Kirk his life tells me you don't learn, or more likely you are ok if your lies cause deaths.
Taro T Posted September 15 Posted September 15 (edited) 40 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: "Brian Kilmeade said that homeless people should get involuntary lethal injections. They should be killed" This is what the OP initially said, which is not what Kilmeade said, he said certain violent criminal homeless people should be given the death sentence. The fact that you guys lie about what is said after your lies cost Charlie Kirk his life tells me you don't learn, or more likely you are ok if your lies cause deaths. Even IF what he said was strictly directed at the violent homeless and mentally ill people, such as the man that slaughtered the Ukrainian refugee woman; that still is a horrible thought. To advocate for involuntary lethal injections for the mentally ill displays a level of compassion that is right there with those that are celebrating the death of Charlie Kirk. If someone is mentally ill, they by definition aren't fully in control of their actions, and therefore should not be made to forfeit the rest of their natural life for whatever it is that person is accused of. The person on the left in that discussion suggested that these people need to be institutionalized if they are a danger to those around them (not the exact words, but the sentiment) AND they refuse treatments / medicines that can keep the true mental illness under check. That is a reasonable position to take. How to actually implement something like that would require far more discussion and nuance before implementing it; but it can be considered particularly if we're looking at stuff like schizophrenia to be the mental illness and not conservativism or liberalism to be the mental illness. Kilmeade apologized for the comments he made. Hopefully they were a misspeaking in the moment that went horribly awry; but even if they were, he should consider himself very fortunate if he still has a job in front of the camera. Edited September 15 by Taro T 1
Orlando Buffalo Posted September 15 Posted September 15 22 minutes ago, Taro T said: Even IF what he said was strictly directed at the violent homeless and mentally ill people, such as the man that slaughtered the Ukrainian refugee woman; that still is a horrible thought. To advocate for involuntary lethal injections for the mentally ill displays a level of compassion that is right there with those that are celebrating the death of Charlie Kirk. If someone is mentally ill, they by definition aren't fully in control of their actions, and therefore should not be made to forfeit the rest of their natural life for whatever it is that person is accused of. The person on the left in that discussion suggested that these people need to be institutionalized if they are a danger to those around them (not the exact words, but the sentiment) AND they refuse treatments / medicines that can keep the true mental illness under check. That is a reasonable position to take. How to actually implement something like that would require far more discussion and nuance before implementing it; but it can be considered particularly if we're looking at stuff like schizophrenia to be the mental illness and not conservativism or liberalism to be the mental illness. Kilmeade apologized for the comments he made. Hopefully they were a misspeaking in the moment that went horribly awry; but even if they were, he should consider himself very fortunate if he still has a job in front of the camera. One I did not agree with his statement, in fact I stated that multiple times through this thread. The OP lied about the statement and I called him out for it. Secondly what is the appropriate response to this guy in Charlotte and others like him? Is releasing him because of his mental illness a reasonable response?
Taro T Posted September 15 Posted September 15 4 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: One I did not agree with his statement, in fact I stated that multiple times through this thread. The OP lied about the statement and I called him out for it. Secondly what is the appropriate response to this guy in Charlotte and others like him? Is releasing him because of his mental illness a reasonable response? The appropriate thing to have done would've been to not release him into the general public for a 14th time. That horse is sadly out of the barn.
JDHillFan Posted September 15 Posted September 15 1 minute ago, Taro T said: The appropriate thing to have done would've been to not release him into the general public for a 14th time. That horse is sadly out of the barn. You are absolutely right. For being absolutely right in this instance, there are people that will call you a hate-filled bigot. That’s something, isn’t it? 1
Orlando Buffalo Posted September 15 Posted September 15 5 minutes ago, Taro T said: The appropriate thing to have done would've been to not release him into the general public for a 14th time. That horse is sadly out of the barn. As far as insane ideas which is more insane: releasing a violent felon back into society to murder again or kill him humanely? Once again he is not a one time criminal but 15 time criminal with many violent crimes.
Taro T Posted September 15 Posted September 15 Just now, Orlando Buffalo said: As far as insane ideas which is more insane: releasing a violent felon back into society to murder again or kill him humanely? Once again he is not a one time criminal but 15 time criminal with many violent crimes. Are you asking that PRIOR to him having taken innocent life? Because if you are, you are heading to a REALLY dark place. And that man that murdered the Ukrainian girl AFAIK had never murdered anyone prior to taking her innocent life. And, for clarity, WHY do those have to be the only 2 options? There are a LOT of stops on the continuum between release violent felons with little or nothing more than a slap on the wrist and executing lovingly those that are violent or those we deem inconvenient.
Orlando Buffalo Posted September 15 Posted September 15 1 minute ago, Taro T said: Are you asking that PRIOR to him having taken innocent life? Because if you are, you are heading to a REALLY dark place. And that man that murdered the Ukrainian girl AFAIK had never murdered anyone prior to taking her innocent life. And, for clarity, WHY do those have to be the only 2 options? There are a LOT of stops on the continuum between release violent felons with little or nothing more than a slap on the wrist and executing lovingly those that are violent or those we deem inconvenient. I agree with the middle option for these mentally ill people, which is jail. And they remain in jail until they are well enough to face trial. But you do miss on of my points, what to Dems are doing is literal insanity, what a single talking head suggested is more reasonable then what Dems are currently doing
Joe Ferguson forever Posted September 15 Posted September 15 1 hour ago, Orlando Buffalo said: "Brian Kilmeade said that homeless people should get involuntary lethal injections. They should be killed" This is what the OP initially said, which is not what Kilmeade said, he said certain violent criminal homeless people should be given the death sentence. The fact that you guys lie about what is said after your lies cost Charlie Kirk his life tells me you don't learn, or more likely you are ok if your lies cause deaths. So you didn’t bother to search for his he said exactly quote. from USA today When a co-host said mentally ill and homeless people should be more aggressively detained and forcibly treated, Kilmeade added: "Or involuntary injection or something. Just kill 'em." You’re the liar. And you just expect to get away with it. Ah, no.
Orlando Buffalo Posted September 15 Posted September 15 6 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: So you didn’t bother to search for his he said exactly quote. from USA today When a co-host said mentally ill and homeless people should be more aggressively detained and forcibly treated, Kilmeade added: "Or involuntary injection or something. Just kill 'em." You’re the liar. And you just expect to get away with it. Ah, no. You truly are a willing moron but CBS states that he was discussing the Charlotte man when he said this, so the right wing extremist at CBS are on my side. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/fox-news-brian-kilmeade-apologizes-mentally-ill-homeless-people-executed/
Taro T Posted September 15 Posted September 15 11 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: I agree with the middle option for these mentally ill people, which is jail. And they remain in jail until they are well enough to face trial. But you do miss on of my points, what to Dems are doing is literal insanity, what a single talking head suggested is more reasonable then what Dems are currently doing Wadr, not missing your point at all. You are saying one "humanely" rendered act of insanity is better than another act of insanity (or evilness or stupidity or whatever it was that describes that judge's decision to release him essentially on his own recognizance). Will not agree that it is better, again wadr. IMHO it's like being asked to choose whether it's better to die in a fiery autocrash or merely a severely violent autocrash. At the end of the consideration, neither is a good option.
Orlando Buffalo Posted September 15 Posted September 15 6 minutes ago, Taro T said: Wadr, not missing your point at all. You are saying one "humanely" rendered act of insanity is better than another act of insanity (or evilness or stupidity or whatever it was that describes that judge's decision to release him essentially on his own recognizance). Will not agree that it is better, again wadr. IMHO it's like being asked to choose whether it's better to die in a fiery autocrash or merely a severely violent autocrash. At the end of the consideration, neither is a good option. You are missing the point, maybe intentionally, one idea was thrown out flippantly on TV and few people agreed with it, the other is the policy we are currently running with in liberal cities right now.
Recommended Posts