Author Topic: Morning links: Number killed by U.S. police in 2015 reaches 1,000  (Read 1954 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SubliminallyOveranalyzed

  • Break From What You Know...........And You Will Know More
  • Subordinate Wasp
  • ***
  • Posts: 242
  • a
Morning links: Number killed by U.S. police in 2015 reaches 1,000

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2015/11/17/morning-links-number-killed-by-u-s-police-in-2015-reaches-1000/?postshare=8111448061189389&tid=ss_fb

 


Quote
--The number of people killed by U.S. police in 2015 just reached 1,000 — 860 were killed by gunfire.

--Man shuts door on police who tried to enter his home without a warrant. The police then broke down his door and killed him.

--It isn’t security vs. liberty, it’s more liberty = more security.

speaking of police brutality, check this out.... video of a beatdown by two san fran cops on a white dude with their batons......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1rfN5jPFJE&feature=youtu.be

and this one where they put a bag of weed in a dude's pocket.......ScumBags!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pumP76-NV70
« Last Edit: November 21, 2015, 06:13:44 AM by SubliminallyOveranalyzed »
~Is there any means by which any number of individuals can delegate to someone else the moral right to do something which none of the individuals have the moral right to do themselves? ~Do those who wield political power (presidents, legislators, etc.) have the moral right to do things which other people do not have the moral right to do? If so, from whom and how did they acquire such a right? ~When law-makers and law-enforcers use coercion and force in the name of law and government, do they bear the same responsibility for their actions that anyone else would who did the same thing on his own? ~3) Is there any process (e.g., constitutions, elections, legislation) by which human beings can transform an immoral act into a moral act (without changing the act itself)?

Offline Necrogram

  • Larvae
  • *
  • Posts: 39
  • "Notice my hand never leaves my arm"
Re: Morning links: Number killed by U.S. police in 2015 reaches 1,000
« Reply #1 on: November 21, 2015, 06:14:39 AM »
Total scumbags. Tripe to say the least. I'm trying to not get started I could be typing all night. Though I will probably revisit this post and do so!!

"People who give up their liberty for "saftey" don't  deserve saftey or liberty" -Benjamin Franklin

It's getting more and more laughable at the way people are thinking that giving up your 2nd ammendment right for safety will actually make them safer. I'm sure any terrorist entering a "gun-free zone" will just have a look inside himself when he's about to blow up Americans and decide to just lovingly disarm himself. Meanwhile under deception from the defacto current criminal us administration us citezenz are willingly giving up their rights. While DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY is buying up bullets by the billions and hassling Americans at TSA CHECKPOINTS ALL WHILE FUNDING ISIS.  AND MILITARZING POLICE. SICKENING!!
Look up Jade helm.
And not one fucking scumbag cop has been held accountable.
TYRANNY.
You got me started Overanylyzed! Your turn..LOL

Offline SubliminallyOveranalyzed

  • Break From What You Know...........And You Will Know More
  • Subordinate Wasp
  • ***
  • Posts: 242
  • a
Re: Morning links: Number killed by U.S. police in 2015 reaches 1,000
« Reply #2 on: November 21, 2015, 09:11:56 AM »
LoL, right right you are sir, I preach that same message to most I come into contact with.... Sadly though, many are content to remain oblivious to the fact that they are direct contributors to a good majority of the primary things that continually hold us back, not only as a nation, but as a species that is supposed to evolve and progress, not regress and oppress itself via meaningless attempts to enforce one radically zealot groups' morals on an entire population of it's fellow humans!

just up and decide they're gonna teach people how to have good habits, through a legally binding moral enforcement of one group's beliefs and values, who are as fallible and unsure about their beliefs as every other member of the damn species! can't none of us EVER know we are right enough to force our views on another..... period

god damnit, you done got me started!
~Is there any means by which any number of individuals can delegate to someone else the moral right to do something which none of the individuals have the moral right to do themselves? ~Do those who wield political power (presidents, legislators, etc.) have the moral right to do things which other people do not have the moral right to do? If so, from whom and how did they acquire such a right? ~When law-makers and law-enforcers use coercion and force in the name of law and government, do they bear the same responsibility for their actions that anyone else would who did the same thing on his own? ~3) Is there any process (e.g., constitutions, elections, legislation) by which human beings can transform an immoral act into a moral act (without changing the act itself)?

Offline SubliminallyOveranalyzed

  • Break From What You Know...........And You Will Know More
  • Subordinate Wasp
  • ***
  • Posts: 242
  • a
Re: Morning links: Number killed by U.S. police in 2015 reaches 1,000
« Reply #3 on: November 21, 2015, 10:12:04 AM »
The justification for freedom is that we don't know, we can never be sure we're right when we think so ..... And who are we to judge for our fellow man .... Humility, the belief that, after all, I can try and persuade you, but I can't force you ...... must ultimately rest on the recognition of the limitations of our knowledge.

We don't say there's no such thing as sin, all we say is we can't be sure we're right when we think so.

You know that's the problem, and it's not easy to face.....

We want freedom, in my opinion, 1st, because we cannot know, we can never be sure we're right, and therefore we have no right to force our views on other people.....

And 2nd, because the thing that's really important, are the individual's own values, and their own beliefs.....

If you're not free to sin, then neither are you free to be virtuous.......

Virtue is a meaningless concept, unless an individual has a free will to choose between one act and another ~~ Milton Friedman via a University discussion/open-question type lecture via  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4z9UeuLj5fA

(particularly when it's an act that involves consenting adults as all who take part in it) ........ VictimLess crime is not crime .....

--Law enforcement was invented by a guy named Robert Peele, in England, in the early 1800's. And he designed it to protect people from other people. What is being done with drug laws, is we are telling Law Enforcement to try and protect people from themselfves. They were not designed, nor are they capable of teaching people how to have good habits, and not engage in consentual behavior with other adults.

--Prohibiting the drugs is essentially seeing them as the problem, instead of the people. We were taught to think that drugs are bad...

--However, the drugs do not have a choice, conscioussness, or awareness at all. They are inanimate, and lifeless objects, and thus, not capable of having any responsibility for any harm that is done with them. Humans, on the other hand, have a choice, conscioussness, and awareness.....and are very capable of having responsibility for our actions and choices ...... especially we adults :)

--The reason we decided to start teaching people how to have good habits is multi-sided, but a brief summary of just a few of those sides is The WCTU (Women's Christian Temperance Union), their influence over the politicians and policy makers in the late 1800's and early 1900's, and their insistence of removing alcohol and any use of it from society.

--The chinese immigrants in the late 1800's were another major cause of it. And that was brought about by opium use and opium dens of the chinese. White men who lived anywhere near these chinese immigrants, feared their daughters would go to these opium dens and get high, which was not a problem.... but the problem was that they were afraid the opium might influence them to possibly sleep with these chinese immigrants.

--Black people and cocaine use(the newspaper articles claiming that cocaine made them superhuman in essence, via making them better marksmen, made them go on a frenzy and rape white women, made them disobey, and made them immune to .32 caliber bullets, which is why Many southern states' law enforcemnt at that time swithed to .38 caliber bullets..... because of the New York Times article in 1913 or 1914 ......  NEGRO COCAINE "FIENDS" NEW SOUTHERN MENACE

New York Times, Sunday February 8, 1914

Murder and Insanity Increasing Among Lower Class Because They Have Taken to "Sniffing" Since Being Deprived of Whisky by Prohibition

Edward Huntington Williams, M.D.

--Also not given enough credit, is the beginning of literalism in interpretation of the protestant bible...... Prior to the early 20th century, the bible had not been taken literally......

Literalism is a very new phenomenon. In the 2000 year history of the protestant gospels, it's only been about 100 years, in which christians have read them as literal and inerrant (incapable of being wrong) .  That might come as a shock to a lot of christians, but it is fact, not opinion, or fabrication.   source.....   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6Jivan2MPQ

The concept of literalsm can be traced to the early 20th century. A group of protestants, particularly in the U.S. and Europe, who in response to the scientific revolution, decided that.....  if that which is true, is that which can be factually verified, then the gospels must be able to be factually verified, otherwise they're not true ......... and from there it took off!!

And that's never been how the gospel's were intended to be read.....

But that being said, a better path seems to be to start recognizing the difference between religion and faith.... 

Religion is just a language of symbols & metaphors to help us express faith to ourselves, & to others. If we can just figure out that the faith that so many people around the world have, is deeply held in common, and religion is what's different, we'd see that religion is not the end that it's viewed as, but just a means to an end, or the path/journey to a destination.......& the values that matter the most, the destination, which is the faith(in whatever=protestant,catholic,muslim,pagan,etc.,etc...) that sustains us..... we all have in common, and are not very fucking different at all......narrow minded ass humans though...... just like women, I always say, can't live with em, can't kill em   ;D  ( or can we ? hehehe  :-X )

--But there is much dirtier laundry than above that also contributed to this ScumBag Fuckery which is essentially prohibitions of anything! it really is nonsense to prohibit anything in a society whose inhabitants claim to be free individuals with free will, living in a free society. Nothing about any of those 3 is true with the prohibition of anything.

And this all ties directly in with the shift of society's belief in individual responsibility, to the late 1800's, and early 1900's belief in Social Responsibility... that's the rationale and logic behind all this childish fucking nonsense of prohibiting anything!

That was the beginning of the ScumBags rise to power... it was the very cornerstone on which the ScumBags laid the foundation for taking over this country..... And since then, we haven't looked back..... One hell of a band-wagon, one must admit...

yep gotta hand it to those ScumBags, and give credit where credit is due I say,

after all, can't take life too serious, cause ain't none of us getting out of it alive   ;)




« Last Edit: November 21, 2015, 11:05:52 AM by SubliminallyOveranalyzed »
~Is there any means by which any number of individuals can delegate to someone else the moral right to do something which none of the individuals have the moral right to do themselves? ~Do those who wield political power (presidents, legislators, etc.) have the moral right to do things which other people do not have the moral right to do? If so, from whom and how did they acquire such a right? ~When law-makers and law-enforcers use coercion and force in the name of law and government, do they bear the same responsibility for their actions that anyone else would who did the same thing on his own? ~3) Is there any process (e.g., constitutions, elections, legislation) by which human beings can transform an immoral act into a moral act (without changing the act itself)?

Offline Necrogram

  • Larvae
  • *
  • Posts: 39
  • "Notice my hand never leaves my arm"
Re: Morning links: Number killed by U.S. police in 2015 reaches 1,000
« Reply #4 on: November 21, 2015, 05:38:58 PM »
YES!!!
And now with the advent of technology in everyone's hand blocking themselves from creativity and into some sad form of entropy meets apathy, it has created some easily  controlled lemmings.
I swear most college campus' now days are just petri dishes for a PC mind control platform using black and white sensitivity training to perpetuate the role of anti- freedom of speech.

It hurts my heart to see how troubled and deceived we have become as a nation.  A place that was founded on liberty, Awake and ALIVE!
Now sadly I am seeing a nation that feels as though they have to answer to someone who they are (MK ULTRA) little  by little , somehow brainwashed into thinking that there are people above them that know better.  Not true!  The role of any officer is to simply keep the peace, hence "peace officer" not "law enforcement"  or better yet as we are seeing these days" FUCKING ROBO COPS" !!

Under the constitution the definition of a crime is only: A. Violence against another person B. Destruction against another's property

All these revised codes are in many cases illegal and all these extra Federal Laws  are also illegal, it is anotherreccomplished in the name of saftey. What a joke.

We saw how safe the Jewish people became.
I'm so thankful and grateful for the freedoms I do have!

Just remember to always pay attention.

😉