New riots in Rochester

[Northcountryman]

2 hours ago, 9jNYstarkOH said:

More body cam footage (do not listen to with kids around) mom should be jailed what a terrible situation.

 

No doubt ; you wanna place blame on ANYONE , blame the lowlife Mom for creating this situation through YEARS OF NEGLECT AND ABUSE 

[Grouse]

Because of her age, we will never hear about any past run ins with the law.  But I'm quite certain we will hear about many more run ins with the law in the future.

Considering the circumstances surrounding this incident, the mayor should clamp down on those protesters with gusto.  Tolerating rioting, looting and violence in response to an out of control juvenile being sprayed, is only going to reinforce the belief non-compliance with LEO's is the proper course of action to garner support.

[BowmanMike]

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

Because of her age, we will never hear about any past run ins with the law.  But I'm quite certain we will hear about many more run ins with the law in the future.

Considering the circumstances surrounding this incident, the mayor should clamp down on those protesters with gusto.  Tolerating rioting, looting and violence in response to an out of control juvenile being sprayed, is only going to reinforce the belief non-compliance with LEO's is the proper course of action to garner support.

I am against the rioting. But you throw the rioters in with the protesters..Protesting is fine. Are the protesters responsible for the rioters? 

That is the same principle when people rail against gun owners when a mass shooting happens. Are gun owners responsible for the nuts that abuse gun ownership? 

[Grouse]

It's easy to see who the rioters are and cull them from the peaceful protesters to stop the looting and burning.  The mayor can do that, but isn't doing it.  Sounds as if you don't think the mayor should do it.

Are gun owners responsible for the nuts that abuse gun ownership?  In the eyes of anti-gun politicians they are.  They are constantly being forced to accept laws that infringe on their rights because some idiot violated a gun law.  It's called "preventative law".  When the government passes a law to prevent anyone from committing a crime because one person did something bad, all of the innocent people bear the brunt of that persons crime.  It's unconstitutional.

No law can require the individual to prove that he won’t violate another’s rights in the absence of evidence that he is going to.

But this is precisely what gun control laws do. Gun control laws use force against the individual in the absence of any specific evidence that he is about to commit a crime. They say to the rational, responsible gun owner: You may not have or carry a gun because others have used them irrationally or irresponsibly.

This is unjust and intolerable. The government may coercively intervene only when there is an objective threat that someone is going to use force.

The government may respond only to specific threats. It has no right to initiate force against the innocent. And a gun owner is innocent until specific evidence arises that he is threatening to initiate force.

 

“Laws prohibiting or regulating guns across the board represent the evil of preventive law and should be abolished.” - columnist Harry Binswanger

[BowmanMike]

18 minutes ago, Grouse said:

It's easy to see who the rioters are and cull them from the peaceful protesters to stop the looting and burning.  The mayor can do that, but isn't doing it.  Sounds as if you don't think the mayor should do it.

Are gun owners responsible for the nuts that abuse gun ownership?  In the eyes of anti-gun politicians they are.  They are constantly being forced to accept laws that infringe on their rights because some idiot violated a gun law.  It's called "preventative law".  When the government passes a law to prevent anyone from committing a crime because one person did something bad, all of the innocent people bear the brunt of that persons crime.  It's unconstitutional.

No law can require the individual to prove that he won’t violate another’s rights in the absence of evidence that he is going to.

But this is precisely what gun control laws do. Gun control laws use force against the individual in the absence of any specific evidence that he is about to commit a crime. They say to the rational, responsible gun owner: You may not have or carry a gun because others have used them irrationally or irresponsibly.

This is unjust and intolerable. The government may coercively intervene only when there is an objective threat that someone is going to use force.

The government may respond only to specific threats. It has no right to initiate force against the innocent. And a gun owner is innocent until specific evidence arises that he is threatening to initiate force.

 

“Laws prohibiting or regulating guns across the board represent the evil of preventive law and should be abolished.” - columnist Harry Binswanger

I will give you an F for reading comprehension. The rioters should be prosecuted,the protesters should not.

 

[Grouse]

Tell that to the mayor.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

1 hour ago, BowmanMike said:

I am against the rioting. But you throw the rioters in with the protesters..Protesting is fine. Are the protesters responsible for the rioters? 

 

It doesn't appear that that same statement and question are applied by many to the incident at the Capital

[BowmanMike]

13 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

It doesn't appear that that same statement and question are applied by many to the incident at the Capital

Everybody who entered the Capitol is a rioter. Same as everyone entering a store with smashed windows is a looter.

[farmer 52]

If the protesters what to commingle with the rioters, they should be treated the same as the rioters and looters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[diplomat019]

3 minutes ago, farmer 52 said:

If the protesters what to commingle with the rioters, they should be treated the same as the rioters and looters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

100%.   I would love to see everyone at the capitol building and the summer riots have charges pressed against them to the fullest.  

[WNYTRPR]

On 2/2/2021 at 1:07 PM, left field said:

So you've managed to determine that this little kid is lying about her age and possibly working for a drug gangs, but also given the opportunity would have killed a cop.

How screwed up you are. 

You don’t know much about gang life ...

[farmer 52]

Nothing happened at the summer riots,there was looting also and burning,funny how at the capital things had to change.
Can you say double standard or are the scum that occupy Washington more important that the people and businesses from the summer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BowmanMike]

20 minutes ago, farmer 52 said:

Nothing happened at the summer riots,there was looting also and burning,funny how at the capital things had to change.
Can you say double standard or are the scum that occupy Washington more important that the people and businesses from the summer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

you think there is a difference between protesting police violence and attacking the foundation of democracy? 

I do. 

[Grouse]

The idea there is an outbreak of police brutality is as fraudulent as the election they were protesting in DC.  All data and statistics proves the police brutality narrative is false.

A fraudulent election is what attacks the foundation of democracy.

There is a big difference in the way leftists respond to these two issues.  Police are bad and corrupt government is good.

 

[Northcountryman]

2 hours ago, BowmanMike said:

I will give you an F for reading comprehension. The rioters should be prosecuted,the protesters should not.

 

I agree, and the same standard should be applied , of course to the capital hill protestors, right? Very few of them actually engaged in riotous behavior and were simply exercising their rights to free speech by protesting a corrupt and unfair election.

[Northcountryman]

28 minutes ago, BowmanMike said:

you think there is a difference between protesting police violence and attacking the foundation of democracy? 

I do. 

As Ive pointed out many times, your "apples to apples" comparison is inaccurate and invalid

[BowmanMike]

1 hour ago, Northcountryman said:

As Ive pointed out many times, your "apples to apples" comparison is inaccurate and invalid

It is to you guys and i feel bad that you can't see the difference.

 The trump supporters could protest all day everyday at rhe Capitol,but once they broke in it is over the line. Yelling for Pence to be killed etc. etc. That is not protesting. 

[Northcountryman]

1 hour ago, BowmanMike said:

It is to you guys and i feel bad that you can't see the difference.

 The trump supporters could protest all day everyday at rhe Capitol,but once they broke in it is over the line. Yelling for Pence to be killed etc. etc. That is not protesting. 

No, it is inaccurate , period.  What youre doing is invalidating the reasoning or "purpose" behind one groups protest but not the other.  I get that you agree with one and not the other and that is totally legitamate.  But , as always, youre oversimplifying and inaccurately describing the reasoning behind the capital hill riots to vilify them whereas you do the opposite with the Antifa/BLM morons whos reasoning for protest you describe as due to "police violence"as if theyre so virtuous--  Bullshit!! There is NO EXCUSE FOR Destroying private property, looting , burning,  assault and EVEN MURDER .  I dont care what theyre reasoning is, once they went there, they went too far: PERIOD.  Same as the Capital hill rioters: PERIOD. 

I wonder if you were equally outraged when BLM/Antifa staged riotous marches last July that resulted in the President being ushered down into the White House Bunker for his own personal safety. Is that not an assault on our Democracy ? An insurrection? Thats the way you guys describe the Capital Hill Riots.  Also, what about the Kavanaugh Hearings when Leftie loonie rioters stormed the Capital Building and forced their way inside in order to dirupt/interfere with the proceedings.  Is that not an insurrection ? An assault on our democracy?  You cant have it both ways, my friend because thats hypocrisy, pure and simple.

[BowmanMike]

14 minutes ago, Northcountryman said:

No, it is inaccurate , period.  What youre doing is invalidating the reasoning or "purpose" behind one groups protest but not the other.  I get that you agree with one and not the other and that is totally legitamate.  But , as always, youre oversimplifying and inaccurately describing the reasoning behind the capital hill riots to vilify them whereas you do the opposite with the Antifa/BLM morons whos reasoning for protest you describe as due to "police violence"as if theyre so virtuous--  Bullshit!! There is NO EXCUSE FOR Destroying private property, looting , burning,  assault and EVEN MURDER .  I dont care what theyre reasoning is, once they went there, they went too far: PERIOD.  Same as the Capital hill rioters: PERIOD. 

I wonder if you were equally outraged when BLM/Antifa staged riotous marches last July that resulted in the President being ushered down into the White House Bunker for his own personal safety. Is that not an assault on our Democracy ? An insurrection? Thats the way you guys describe the Capital Hill Riots.  Also, what about the Kavanaugh Hearings when Leftie loonie rioters stormed the Capital Building and forced their way inside in order to dirupt/interfere with the proceedings.  Is that not an insurrection ? An assault on our democracy?  You cant have it both ways, my friend because thats hypocrisy, pure and simple.

Do you even read my posts? How many times do i have to write that any orotest is fjne,but rioting is not. Protesting is lawful. Destroying stuff is not. Take your glasses of for a second to see.

You are drawing a lot of conclusions from my statements as well that are not there. 

Edited February 4, 2021 by BowmanMike

[9jNYstarkOH]

1 hour ago, BowmanMike said:

It is to you guys and i feel bad that you can't see the difference.

 The trump supporters could protest all day everyday at rhe Capitol,but once they broke in it is over the line. Yelling for Pence to be killed etc. etc. That is not protesting. 

Is it okay if they were let on to capital grounds and into the capital building?

[BowmanMike]

34 minutes ago, Northcountryman said:

No, it is inaccurate , period.  What youre doing is invalidating the reasoning or "purpose" behind one groups protest but not the other.  I get that you agree with one and not the other and that is totally legitamate.  But , as always, youre oversimplifying and inaccurately describing the reasoning behind the capital hill riots to vilify them whereas you do the opposite with the Antifa/BLM morons whos reasoning for protest you describe as due to "police violence"as if theyre so virtuous--  Bullshit!! There is NO EXCUSE FOR Destroying private property, looting , burning,  assault and EVEN MURDER .  I dont care what theyre reasoning is, once they went there, they went too far: PERIOD.  Same as the Capital hill rioters: PERIOD. 

I wonder if you were equally outraged when BLM/Antifa staged riotous marches last July that resulted in the President being ushered down into the White House Bunker for his own personal safety. Is that not an assault on our Democracy ? An insurrection? Thats the way you guys describe the Capital Hill Riots.  Also, what about the Kavanaugh Hearings when Leftie loonie rioters stormed the Capital Building and forced their way inside in order to dirupt/interfere with the proceedings.  Is that not an insurrection ? An assault on our democracy?  You cant have it both ways, my friend because thats hypocrisy, pure and simple.

When the people stormed the capitOl,( it is spelled with an o) for kavaunaughs hearings it was to protest one persons selection to a court,not to invalidate the whole countries election. That being said,they also should not have forced their way in and should have gotten into trouble for that.

I think you are over complicating things.

Edited February 4, 2021 by BowmanMike

[BowmanMike]

1 minute ago, 9jNYstarkOH said:

Is it okay if they were let on to capital grounds and into the capital building?

hell no.That just means those cops should be prosecuted.

 

[9jNYstarkOH]

7 minutes ago, BowmanMike said:

hell no.That just means those cops should be prosecuted.

 

How so legally, if they were invited in how can they be trespassing? Who has more rights to invite them onto capitOl ground than capitOl police?

Edited February 4, 2021 by 9jNYstarkOH

[farmer 52]

you think there is a difference between protesting police violence and attacking the foundation of democracy? 
I do. 

Protests against police violence ,constitutes burning and looting,not in any way shape or form.
I am not condoning what happened in DC.Two totally different circumstances.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BowmanMike]

28 minutes ago, farmer 52 said:

Protests against police violence ,constitutes burning and looting,not in any way shape or form.
I am not condoning what happened in DC.Two totally different circumstances.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ok,so we are on the same page for the most part. I dont think BLM protest are violence until someone starts throwing things at police or damaging property,that is when things cross the line to a riot. There have been plenty of BLM protests that did not turn violent.