I'm sorry, but under new gun laws all vets that may be suffering from PTSD must immediately surrender all weapons from their homes.
All the PTSD survivors of Sandy Hook must do so as well.
LOL! AND YOU'RE SORRY???
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
However I find it only fitting that PTSD "victims"(are volunteer soldiers really victims of anything except voluntary self abuse?) should absolutely admit possible instability and surrender all their weapons.
and you know this as a fact, how? You've been trained by costumed instructors???? You saw it in the movies???? You have a friend who has a friend that told you so????? You read it in the National Enquirer? It's fact because you say so??????
There is this new thing that was invented called the world wide web or i-n-t-e-r-n-e-t. You can actually research stories and quote the police themselves. Let me show you...shall I? This example is from our very own great state of New York.
Quoted Text
Proposal to change shoot to kill policy for cops
NEW YORK (WABC) -- There is outrage over a proposal to change the 'shoot to kill' training for police officers.
A bill in New York's Assembly would require officers to use minimum force with the intent to stop suspects, not kill them.
Officers say it's unrealistic and would put lives in danger.
"Any sort of additional requirement that is shoot to wound, it's impossible to implement," said Commissioner Ray Kelly.
The PBA President is also disputing the bill. "We always use the minimum amount of force. Sometimes the minimal amount is deadly physical force to stop that person from killing a person or a police officer," said Pat Lynch. The bill's supporters say the controversial police shooting of Sean Bell is one tragic reason why the deadly force approach needs to be dropped.
Brooklyn assembly members Annette Robinson and Darryl Towns sponsored the minimum force proposal.
From Albany, Mr. Towns explained, "The bill gives us an opportunity to open up a dialogue regarding police procedures."
But police policy expert Dr. Maki Haberfeld says she knows of no law enforcement agency, domestic or foreign that employs a shoot to stop approach.
"The Polish police tried to train officers to shoot at body parts and there were casualties and they basically gave up. It's a very dangerous perspective," she said.
As you can see Joebxr, when the costumed government agent is asked to sacrifice their personal safety with laws proposed to protect the general public from fatal police shootings, it seems to get quite the opposition from those in costumes. It seems that a law proposed that restricts the police's ability to shoot and kill at their own discretion to protect the safety of the person in the costume is a non starter in New York, yet when the average citizen in New York is confronted with a threat, state law requires you retreat. That's because the costumed agent's life is of greater value as box clearly pointed out in the new legislation giving first responders more value to their lives.
..., yet when the average citizen in New York is confronted with a threat, state law requires you retreat. That's because the costumed agent's life is of greater value as box clearly pointed out in the new legislation giving first responders more value to their lives.
God Bless America!
Most police deaths and military deaths are from suicide.
Perhaps a new law with mandatory life imprisonment will prevent suicides.
There is this new thing that was invented called the world wide web or i-n-t-e-r-n-e-t. You can actually research stories and quote the police themselves. Let me show you...shall I? This example is from our very own great state of New York.
As you can see Joebxr, when the costumed government agent is asked to sacrifice their personal safety with laws proposed to protect the general public from fatal police shootings, it seems to get quite the opposition from those in costumes. It seems that a law proposed that restricts the police's ability to shoot and kill at their own discretion to protect the safety of the person in the costume is a non starter in New York, yet when the average citizen in New York is confronted with a threat, state law requires you retreat. That's because the costumed agent's life is of greater value as box clearly pointed out in the new legislation giving first responders more value to their lives.
God Bless America!
Ahhh, but you see there is something outside of Cicero World called "R-E-A-L-I-T-Y"...which means that other people wear uniforms besides Police, and they are trained with weapons too, and that training does not follow your narrow definition that you have assigned to all uniformed people to suit your agenda. That's called stereotyping. Now, again, prove that all UNIFORMED people were trained to perform with a weapon as you have indicated....i.e. SHOOT TO KILL ONLY! Because I can tell you for a fact, I was trained with many weapons, and SHOOT TO KILL was not the only instruction given, because we were trained to use judgment and appropriate force. But I know you have a hard time believing that....but that's okay, cuz your opinion on that DOESN'T MEAN SQUAT!!!! You never walked the walk, but you are so ready to condemn those that did!
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
Ahhh, but you see there is something outside of Cicero World called "R-E-A-L-I-T-Y"...which means that other people wear uniforms besides Police, and they are trained with weapons too, and that training does not follow your narrow definition that you have assigned to all uniformed people to suit your agenda. That's called stereotyping. Now, again, prove that all UNIFORMED people were trained to perform with a weapon as you have indicated....i.e. SHOOT TO KILL ONLY! Because I can tell you for a fact, I was trained with many weapons, and SHOOT TO KILL was not the only instruction given, because we were trained to use judgment and appropriate force. But I know you have a hard time believing that....but that's okay, cuz your opinion on that DOESN'T MEAN SQUAT!!!! You never walked the walk, but you are so ready to condemn those that did!
I have to agree with you on this one. Every person in uniform is not taught the same.
With that being said I will say that most people associate the police uniforms with a uniform standard of conduct.
That also applies to the military.
Therefore it is not illogical to conclude that those in similar uniforms are likely to continue to kill the innocent, as has been done thousands of times by the same type of persons in uniform.
And as well intentioned as many police and soldiers are, they are guilty by association just like the crypts and bloods.
Most people don't take police jobs intent on violating what most people are their rights.
Most soldiers don't join intending to kill innocent people referred to as collateral damage.
The rights violations lawsuits, settlements and judgements against the police fail to end the seemingly endless violations.
The outrage heard from around the world fails to end collateral damage inflicted on the innocent either.
Both uniformed groups accept the deaths and violations and continue to perform as directed.
Knowing full well that taking innocent lives and violating a person's rights are wrong.
Perhaps the guilt of doing what they are told, knowing it to cause the deaths and violations described, contributes to the over 50% of all deaths of both groups being suicides.
Knowing these statistics should disqualify police and military from weapons possession unless actively on full duty. No weapons should be kept while off-duty.
I have to agree with you on this one. Every person in uniform is not taught the same. With that being said I will say that most people associate the police uniforms with a uniform standard of conduct. That also applies to the military.
Therefore it is not illogical to conclude that those in similar uniforms are likely to continue to kill the innocent, as has been done thousands of times by the same type of persons in uniform. NOT A LOGICAL CONCLUSION...IT'S A BIASED ASSUMPTION WITHOUT MERIT
And as well intentioned as many police and soldiers are, they are guilty by association just like the crypts and bloods. STEREOTYPED...SAD BEHAVIOR OF A FEW IN THE WORLD THAT FORM THIS TYPE OF ASSOCIATION USUALLY BASED ON PERSONAL BIAS AND NOT ON REASONABLE ABILITY TO SEPARATE THE DIFFERENCES
Most people don't take police jobs intent on violating what most people are their rights. FINALLY A TRUE STATEMENT THAT SHOULD BE THE BASIS OF OPINIONS Most soldiers don't join intending to kill innocent people referred to as collateral damage. FINALLY ANOTHER TRUE STATEMENT THAT SHOULD BE THE BASIS OF OPINIONS
The rights violations lawsuits, settlements and judgements against the police fail to end the seemingly endless violations. BAD APPLES IN EVERY WALK OF LIFE. POOR HIRING PRACTICES IN EVERY WALK OF LIFE. UNFORTUNATE THAT THE NUT JOBS SLIP THROUGH THE CRACK
The outrage heard from around the world fails to end collateral damage inflicted on the innocent either.
Both uniformed groups accept the deaths and violations and continue to perform as directed. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! YOU CANNOT STATE THIS IS FACT AND YOU DEFINATELY CANNOT STATE IT AS A BLANKET FACT FOR ALL....THAT IS WHY YOU AND I HAVE AN ISSUE. JUST LIKE CICERO, YOU MAKE BLANKET ASSOCIATIONS WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THAT MANY OF US ARE INDIVIDUALS EVEN THOUGH WE WORE A UNIFORM. WAKE UP. WE DID NOT AND DO NOT BLINDLY FOLLOW. WE HAVE MINDS OF OUR OWN. AND HAD YOU JOINED YOU WOULD HAVE UNDERSTOOD THE CONDUCT UNDER WHICH WE WERE OBLIGATED TO FOLLOW. TOO MANY PEOPLE BELIEVED IN CODE RED BECUASE TOM CRUISE SAID SO.....BS! IF SUCH IGNORANCE EXISTED, IT WASN'T AROUND ME AND MY TEAM OR MY OTHER FELLOW MARINES THAT I SERVED WITH. Knowing full well that taking innocent lives and violating a person's rights are wrong. SEE ABOVE Perhaps the guilt of doing what they are told, knowing it to cause the deaths and violations described, contributes to the over 50% of all deaths of both groups being suicides. ASSUMPTION NOT FACT. SUICIDE CAN NEVER BE EXPLAINED EVEN WHEN A NOTE IS LEFT. I CAN SURMISE JUST AS EASILY THAT MILITARY SUICIDE IS BECUASE OF INABILITY TO DEAL WITH THE FAILURE TO INTEGRATE BACK INTO SOCIETY BECUASE OF THE REJECTION THEY RECIEVE FROM CIVILIANS...OR INABILITY TO FIND WORK AND SUPPORT THEIR FAMILIES; OR INABILITY TO INTEGRATE INTO SOCIETY AND NOT ACCEPTED BACK INTO THE MILITARY; OR....OR....OR..... MANY SCENARIOS CAN BE SURMISED! Knowing these statistics should disqualify police and military from weapons possession unless actively on full duty. No weapons should be kept while off-duty. I COULD ONLY AGREE WITH THIS IF ALL CIVILIANS WERE DISQUALIFIED. YOU ARE SAYING THEY SHOULD BE DISQUALIFIED BASED ON ASSUMPTIONS AND "POSSIBLE" NUT JOB MENTALITIES....GUESS WHAT, MANY CIVILIANS QUALIFY FOR THE NUT JOB MENTALITY MORE THAN THE UNIFORM PEOPLE DO...THERE'S SEVERL ON THIS BOARD THAT I THINK ARE BORDERLINE POSTAL....LET THEM GIVE UP THEIR WEAPONS FIRST, THEN MAYBE THE OTHERS SHOULD.
ALL THAT IS SAID IMHO
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
I have to agree with you on this one. Every person in uniform is not taught the same. With that being said I will say that most people associate the police uniforms with a uniform standard of conduct. That also applies to the military.
Therefore it is not illogical to conclude that those in similar uniforms are likely to continue to kill the innocent, as has been done thousands of times by the same type of persons in uniform. NOT A LOGICAL CONCLUSION...IT'S A BIASED ASSUMPTION WITHOUT MERIT
And as well intentioned as many police and soldiers are, they are guilty by association just like the crypts and bloods. STEREOTYPED...SAD BEHAVIOR OF A FEW IN THE WORLD THAT FORM THIS TYPE OF ASSOCIATION USUALLY BASED ON PERSONAL BIAS AND NOT ON REASONABLE ABILITY TO SEPARATE THE DIFFERENCES
Most people don't take police jobs intent on violating what most people are their rights. FINALLY A TRUE STATEMENT THAT SHOULD BE THE BASIS OF OPINIONS Most soldiers don't join intending to kill innocent people referred to as collateral damage. FINALLY ANOTHER TRUE STATEMENT THAT SHOULD BE THE BASIS OF OPINIONS
The rights violations lawsuits, settlements and judgements against the police fail to end the seemingly endless violations. BAD APPLES IN EVERY WALK OF LIFE. POOR HIRING PRACTICES IN EVERY WALK OF LIFE. UNFORTUNATE THAT THE NUT JOBS SLIP THROUGH THE CRACK
The outrage heard from around the world fails to end collateral damage inflicted on the innocent either.
Both uniformed groups accept the deaths and violations and continue to perform as directed. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! YOU CANNOT STATE THIS IS FACT AND YOU DEFINATELY CANNOT STATE IT AS A BLANKET FACT FOR ALL....THAT IS WHY YOU AND I HAVE AN ISSUE. JUST LIKE CICERO, YOU MAKE BLANKET ASSOCIATIONS WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THAT MANY OF US ARE INDIVIDUALS EVEN THOUGH WE WORE A UNIFORM. WAKE UP. WE DID NOT AND DO NOT BLINDLY FOLLOW. WE HAVE MINDS OF OUR OWN. AND HAD YOU JOINED YOU WOULD HAVE UNDERSTOOD THE CONDUCT UNDER WHICH WE WERE OBLIGATED TO FOLLOW. TOO MANY PEOPLE BELIEVED IN CODE RED BECUASE TOM CRUISE SAID SO.....BS! IF SUCH IGNORANCE EXISTED, IT WASN'T AROUND ME AND MY TEAM OR MY OTHER FELLOW MARINES THAT I SERVED WITH. Knowing full well that taking innocent lives and violating a person's rights are wrong. SEE ABOVE Perhaps the guilt of doing what they are told, knowing it to cause the deaths and violations described, contributes to the over 50% of all deaths of both groups being suicides. ASSUMPTION NOT FACT. SUICIDE CAN NEVER BE EXPLAINED EVEN WHEN A NOTE IS LEFT. I CAN SURMISE JUST AS EASILY THAT MILITARY SUICIDE IS BECUASE OF INABILITY TO DEAL WITH THE FAILURE TO INTEGRATE BACK INTO SOCIETY BECUASE OF THE REJECTION THEY RECIEVE FROM CIVILIANS...OR INABILITY TO FIND WORK AND SUPPORT THEIR FAMILIES; OR INABILITY TO INTEGRATE INTO SOCIETY AND NOT ACCEPTED BACK INTO THE MILITARY; OR....OR....OR..... MANY SCENARIOS CAN BE SURMISED! Knowing these statistics should disqualify police and military from weapons possession unless actively on full duty. No weapons should be kept while off-duty. I COULD ONLY AGREE WITH THIS IF ALL CIVILIANS WERE DISQUALIFIED. YOU ARE SAYING THEY SHOULD BE DISQUALIFIED BASED ON ASSUMPTIONS AND "POSSIBLE" NUT JOB MENTALITIES....GUESS WHAT, MANY CIVILIANS QUALIFY FOR THE NUT JOB MENTALITY MORE THAN THE UNIFORM PEOPLE DO...THERE'S SEVERL ON THIS BOARD THAT I THINK ARE BORDERLINE POSTAL....LET THEM GIVE UP THEIR WEAPONS FIRST, THEN MAYBE THE OTHERS SHOULD.
ALL THAT IS SAID IMHO
So your argument is that one should not expect uniform behavior from those who join armed uniformed services?
That is a weak argument.
Hundreds of years of data suggests that atrocities will continue.
That those who serve will continue to act similarly.
There is no reason to expect a different outcome from performing the exact same duties.
Very serious denial issues are present in your opinions.
My argument is simple....you cannot associate behavior as being the standard for all Military, active or not, just becuase of a uniform...that is an absurd statement and assumption. I have no denial issues...you have bias issues. Blanket profiling of people in uniform is what I read in your posts....thought you were against that kind of judgement. Guess not!!!!
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
Ahhh, but you see there is something outside of Cicero World called "R-E-A-L-I-T-Y"...which means that other people wear uniforms besides Police, and they are trained with weapons too, and that training does not follow your narrow definition that you have assigned to all uniformed people to suit your agenda. That's called stereotyping. Now, again, prove that all UNIFORMED people were trained to perform with a weapon as you have indicated....i.e. SHOOT TO KILL ONLY! Because I can tell you for a fact, I was trained with many weapons, and SHOOT TO KILL was not the only instruction given, because we were trained to use judgment and appropriate force. But I know you have a hard time believing that....but that's okay, cuz your opinion on that DOESN'T MEAN SQUAT!!!! You never walked the walk, but you are so ready to condemn those that did!
Ok, fair enough, I should have specified the costume. I assumed since I was posting in response to domestic gun grabbing that you knew I was talking about the domestic costumes and not military costumes. Now that we clarified that, are you denying the center mass shoot to kill training taught to domestic police?
And please, show some respect, they are called costumes not uniforms.
My argument is simple....you cannot associate behavior as being the standard for all Military, active or not, just becuase of a uniform...that is an absurd statement and assumption. I have no denial issues...you have bias issues. Blanket profiling of people in uniform is what I read in your posts....thought you were against that kind of judgement. Guess not!!!!
Thank you.
Blanket profiling was invented and inflicted on societies around the world by those in uniforms.
But we shouldn't use it on them.
Very interesting how you claim profiling of the profilers.
I wonder if Joebxr blanket profiled in Vietnam? Did he shoot at any Vietcong in a Vietcong costume or did he introduce himself to each individual Vietcong soldier to find out if that soldier really wanted to kill him? Did he assume the soldiers were thinking independently or did he assume that they all had orders to kill him?
CICERO and L4L, yu shouldn't continue to embarass yourselves by talking about things you don't understand or comprehend and making false and misleading commentaries and accusations about someone. You guys have crossed the line many times on this forum and are feeling quite proud of yourselves. I think the two of you are just your basic bullies that like to stir the pot no matter what the topic. Have a nice night...enjoy your demented thoughts....and quite frankly, both of you should be given psych evals to determine if you should be gun owners....positive you would both fail!!!! But we know you don't need the guns for protection....becuase the men in uniforms will protect your sorry a$$es, regardless.
Cicero, you are far from the person to be preaching about showing respect. You have no concept of what it means.
I hope the two of you are very happy together....nighty night!!!!!!
JUST BECAUSE SISSY SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO...BUT HE THINKS IT DOES!!!!! JUST BECAUSE MC1 SAYS SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SO!!!!!
I wonder if Joebxr blanket profiled in Vietnam? Did he shoot at any Vietcong in a Vietcong costume or did he introduce himself to each individual Vietcong soldier to find out if that soldier really wanted to kill him? Did he assume the soldiers were thinking independently or did he assume that they all had orders to kill him?
Blanket, I'm sure.
Carpet bombing wasn't profiling, right?
Oh but wait, Box stated clearly carpet bombing was only aimed at empty forests.
CICERO and L4L, yu shouldn't continue to embarass yourselves by talking about things you don't understand or comprehend and making false and misleading commentaries and accusations about someone. You guys have crossed the line many times on this forum
My most recent post was in the form of a question, it wasn't a statement.
As far as "crossing the line", I wasn't aware of a line. I'm sure you believe I should be on bended knee praising you for your military service. Sorry, I've told you and box before, I feel sorry for you subjecting yourself to that abuse. I know you're looking for admiration and respect, but my true feelings are of pity. My grandfather was in WWII and father was a marine. I feel sorry that they were subject to the American war machine and it's indoctrination.
Logged
