General Discussion

ZombieHorde

(29,047 posts)

141. That is a more recent trend.

Reply to Art_from_Ark (Reply #140)

Mon May 14, 2012, 10:46 PM

May 2012

Maybe about eight to ten years ago.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

143 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The police have no duty to protect you. Really, they don't. [View all] Zalatix May 2012 OP

They all need to remove Serve and Protect from their badges liberal N proud May 2012 #1

They serve and protect the law, their superiors/brothers not necessarily us. jp11 May 2012 #20

Protect and serve? Bake May 2012 #21

"protect and serve" -- isn't that basically a PR motto of the LAPD? FarCenter May 2012 #26

Agree 1000% Serve The Servants May 2012 #120

Or perhaps truth in advertising? "To Serve and Protect the 1%" Zalatix May 2012 #121

Four justices need to be removed from the court n/t me b zola May 2012 #136

Old article but typical Scalia lunatica May 2012 #2

It up held an even older precedent ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #5

The Felonious 5 have to, don't they? xchrom May 2012 #3

Make that 7... -..__... May 2012 #29

never mind. Pathwalker May 2012 #43

Yep. That's why the 'duty to retreat' boggles my mind and why I'm pro - 'Stand Your Ground'. Edweird May 2012 #4

True. randome May 2012 #6

Unpunished bongbong May 2012 #9

People ALREADY 'get away with it if they have a good enough story'. Edweird May 2012 #10

ok bongbong May 2012 #16

I've never been assaulted by a speed limit sign. Edweird May 2012 #19

You haven't? bongbong May 2012 #37

I live in Montana, and we didn't have speed limits outside of town for a while. ZombieHorde May 2012 #39

Maybe that's why I saw all those crosses lining the roads Art_from_Ark May 2012 #140

That is a more recent trend. ZombieHorde May 2012 #141

My trip to Montana was in 1991 Art_from_Ark May 2012 #142

I don't remember the crosses that far back, but the no speed limit thing was after that date. ZombieHorde May 2012 #143

Nope, no speed limit sign has ever been the least bit aggressive towards me. Edweird May 2012 #41

Try to get out more bongbong May 2012 #79

Whatever. Did you have a point? Edweird May 2012 #81

I want accountability to a jury not to one person who's job it is to win cases jp11 May 2012 #22

You are describing a trial. Which happens after a crime (or charges have been brought). Edweird May 2012 #28

So you think that there should be no trial when someone kills someone else. EOTE May 2012 #38

If it's self defense, no I don't think there should. Edweird May 2012 #40

You're a hoot. So who decides what's self defense or not? The shooter? EOTE May 2012 #42

I feel the same way about your position as you do about mine. Edweird May 2012 #44

What you're calling for is Anarchy. EOTE May 2012 #45

I haven't heard anything about Florida descending into anarchy since SYG passed. Edweird May 2012 #46

What you are asking for is not SYG. EOTE May 2012 #47

Uh, SYG is *EXACTLY* and *SPECIFICALLY* what I'm talking about. Edweird May 2012 #48

You say that you don't think there should be a trial when "self defense" is claimed. EOTE May 2012 #49

I have news for you - the police have had that kind of discretion the whole time. Edweird May 2012 #50

So you believe that civil suits should be allowed? EOTE May 2012 #51

I've stated my position clearly and consistently REPEATEDLY. Edweird May 2012 #52

So either you're being inconsistent and you think that trials SHOULD be allowed. EOTE May 2012 #53

I support SYG. SYG's purpose was to prevent civil suits. Edweird May 2012 #55

Ahhh, so you DO want Zimmermans going free in every state. EOTE May 2012 #56

You don't undertand what edweird is saying... OneTenthofOnePercent May 2012 #57

The immunity from civil liability is what's so sick about that. EOTE May 2012 #60

SYG had NOTHING to do with the delay in charging zimmerman. OneTenthofOnePercent May 2012 #61

No, it just makes it so that when the police fuck up, there's no recourse. EOTE May 2012 #63

Like what? Edweird May 2012 #64

How about a civil suit? EOTE May 2012 #66

A civil suit against? Edweird May 2012 #68

If you're incapable of figuring that out, there's really no point in continuing. EOTE May 2012 #69

Let's hear your grand plan. I want to see what you propose and then show where SYG prevented it. Edweird May 2012 #70

You haven't even attempted to respond to numerous points, so that would be an excersize in futility. EOTE May 2012 #71

No plan? No cites of SYG? Still no honesty? Please substantantiate your claims of MY dishonesty. Edweird May 2012 #72

And once again, you've failed to address numerous issues I've brought up and continue to. EOTE May 2012 #74

Then we are finally done here since you are unwilling (unable) to back your uninformed claims. Edweird May 2012 #75

All you're doing is embarrasing yourself. You need to educate yourself. Edweird May 2012 #62

If your anarchistic view of justice is what's considered "education", no thanks. EOTE May 2012 #65

I'm a Florida resident and I know what the SYG laws does and does not do. You clearly do not. Edweird May 2012 #67

Yup, Stand Your Ground is not the problem here. Zalatix May 2012 #15

I agree with you, but to an extent. Serve The Servants May 2012 #123

Property is important, human lives are not varelse May 2012 #7

No. It is impossible for the police to protect everyone all the time. hack89 May 2012 #33

They don't have the duty guitar man May 2012 #8

That's a rational assessment of the issue. randome May 2012 #12

Holy Vigilante Gospel Gunuttery Fail jpak May 2012 #11

Gun nuttery, where? Zalatix May 2012 #14

The gunners use this argument... ellisonz May 2012 #73

Oh I'm sorry, is the OP factually wrong? Zalatix May 2012 #78

It's impossible for the police to protect everyone all the time. baldguy May 2012 #87

So when you have an armed intruder in your house do you wait for the cops to come Zalatix May 2012 #88

So guns are the one and only solution to any, every & all problems. baldguy May 2012 #90

Tasers should be another widely available option. Zalatix May 2012 #91

Oh, right! That's a GREAT idea! Let's have MORE weapons & MORE violence! baldguy May 2012 #92

On your side are nothing but dead victims who died because they couldn't defend themselves. Zalatix May 2012 #93

Seems to me you're finally admitting the obvious. baldguy May 2012 #94

I'm admitting that you despise a family's right to self-defense. You want the criminals to rule. Zalatix May 2012 #95

Absurd. ellisonz May 2012 #112

Okay so an armed intruder is in your house. You have kids, too. How do you defend your family? Zalatix May 2012 #115

Depends. ellisonz May 2012 #116

No one was talking about an assault rifle. I suggested using a taser directly upthread. Zalatix May 2012 #117

Who is anti-self defense? ellisonz May 2012 #124

I was talking about tasers, not assault rifles, what's your obsession with assault rifles? Zalatix May 2012 #127

Ok, I'm listening sarisataka May 2012 #99

I've never seen an intelligent answer to your question from a gun control advocate - nt badtoworse May 2012 #102

I am an optimist sarisataka May 2012 #104

The answer from them is to flee. Run away, call the cops, and hope insurance covers your losses. Zalatix May 2012 #119

Stage 4 arthritis in doth knees sarisataka May 2012 #130

Tough luck. No guns allowed, no survival for you! Zalatix May 2012 #131

Reasonable, humane action. n/t ellisonz May 2012 #113

That is a start sarisataka May 2012 #135

I asked that question, too. The anti-self defense extremists have no answer. Zalatix May 2012 #118

Maybe we really do need to be able to protect ourselves. - nt badtoworse May 2012 #24

Moar gun nuttery fail! We need to pray the cops reach us before the intruder kills or rapes us. Zalatix May 2012 #77

Paul Kersey-wannabe's with Phallic Replacment issues. Add to which, the article is SEVEN YEARS OLD. apocalypsehow May 2012 #30

So are you saying that since the article is 7 years old, it is factually incorrect? Zalatix May 2012 #82

Uhhh, I made no "argument." Start there, perhaps. apocalypsehow May 2012 #85

FACT!!! You said the article is 7 years old. "Fail all around". Zalatix May 2012 #86

FACT!!! I don't care what silly semantics games you like to play on the internet. apocalypsehow May 2012 #96

FACT!!! You said the article is 7 years old. "Fail all around". That is not a SEMANTIC GAME. Zalatix May 2012 #97

Yes, it is a semantics game, coupled with several falsehoods you continue to spew. apocalypsehow May 2012 #98

What falsehoods? The article is 7 years old but it is quite correct. You claimed it was "fail". Zalatix May 2012 #101

There is not a "backtrack" in sight, and now you're just making non sensical claims that anyone can apocalypsehow May 2012 #105

You are sparring with Jello(tm). PavePusher May 2012 #106

If you're going to follow me around DU trying to re-argue an argument you clearly lost, you should apocalypsehow May 2012 #108

Oh but just about "everyone" supports him/her. It's obvious!!! Zalatix May 2012 #111

Ms. Gonzales should have complained about an OWS group in front of her house... L0oniX May 2012 #13

Sad but true. nt raouldukelives May 2012 #23

The only duty of the pigs is to protect the rich. backscatter712 May 2012 #17

Why are we paying taxes to these people? Baitball Blogger May 2012 #18

Who didn't know this? Your protection is your responsibility. ileus May 2012 #25

100% correct, but that is a reality that the gun control crowd does not like to face. badtoworse May 2012 #27

Ayup, nailed it on the head. Zalatix May 2012 #34

It would be so much more civilized if we just shot each other? daaron May 2012 #59

so Go Vols May 2012 #100

Or your pistol could be taken away from you and used against you. daaron May 2012 #103

Your scenarios are far too limited, by your own bias-filter. PavePusher May 2012 #107

Want to share with us why you need to tote at Presidential campaign rallies? ellisonz May 2012 #114

Really? I'd like to see those statistics you speak of. Zalatix May 2012 #110

If a gun is intended for self-defense, it should be readily accessable in a holster on your belt.... PavePusher May 2012 #129

A gun not in use is properly locked up sarisataka May 2012 #134

But, they can strip search anyone they want. Octafish May 2012 #31

So the govt can make sure you aren't having gay sex, but stopping people who want to kill you? Naah. ck4829 May 2012 #32

Maybe they could do more protecting and serving if TheKentuckian May 2012 #35

We need to look at alternative methods of law enforcement. Zalatix May 2012 #36

The police are there to clean up the blood, and possibly arrest the perpetrator. cigsandcoffee May 2012 #54

Away with this gun nuttery talk! When criminals attack, we're just supposed to call the police Zalatix May 2012 #76

I guess that means. daaron May 2012 #58

We need to talk about a serious overhaul of the law enforcement system. Zalatix May 2012 #83

Better take out that line in the oath and motto "to serve and protect" nolabels May 2012 #80

serve and protect...they don't say "the people" LynnTheDem May 2012 #84

They protect private property, and preSERVE order. NT. Mc Mike May 2012 #89

Why would anyone think they do? RB TexLa May 2012 #109

More than enough reason to have a legit militia started. Great Caesars Ghost May 2012 #122

The Black Panthers tried that. COINTELPRO was the end result. Zalatix May 2012 #128

Well we need to figure a way to keep it secret. Great Caesars Ghost May 2012 #137

The invention of drones made that impossible. Zalatix May 2012 #138

Drones have limitations. Great Caesars Ghost May 2012 #139

A good reason to train in self defense. Serve The Servants May 2012 #125

Scalia is a fucking piece of shit. AverageJoe90 May 2012 #126

that is some BS heyhoheyho May 2012 #132

How so? PavePusher May 2012 #133