(07-18-2020 02:30 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 02:21 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 02:15 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Again, I am criticizing their methods - stop moving the goal posts. If they had a warrant, clearly identified themselves, informed the person they were being arrested and what crime they were being arrested for, and didn’t throw them into an unmarked van, I don’t see the issue.
But the Feds in Portland did the exact opposite of each of those things.
Arguing against this means you support those tactics, you get that, right?

This ain't wire fraud. This is a situation where danger may--or may not--be imminent. That calls for different tactics.

I have said repeatedly that I oppose the patRIOT act and its progeny as impermissible violations of constitutional rights. But I don't know all the facts here, and I am not willing to take a position until I do.

The guy in the video was released without being charged, so that should help us understand if danger was or wasn’t imminent.

This looks like scare tactics and a show of force to try and discourage people from being on the street and protesting - regardless of if they’re actively engaged in vandalism.

I understand if you don’t want to stake a flag on the support or oppose, but actively advocating against criticism like Tanq is doing is different. I’d expect any libertarian to be more sympathetic with the unarmed, non-violent protestor being walked up on by unnamed federal agents and thrown into an unmarked van, than the federal agents. Law enforcement should have the onus on them to clearly justify why they’re using this tactic, because of how frightening it is.

Again, when some asshat in a 'street ninja commando all black' garb does some asshat move, it makes it problematic for anyone in the 'street ninja commando all black garb'.

That is a point to you studiously seem to not take into account in paean to that situation.

Yes it is frightening. If I were contemplating wearing my 'street ninja commando all black' garb to a protest, I might actually think twice about it now. Amazing that. Whether or not your intent is to give cover to some other asshat.

(07-18-2020 10:04 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 09:38 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I can’t wait until masked and unidentified federal agents start grabbing conservative protestors during a Biden administration and the folks around here are asking for the details about what the protestors were doing and arguing that we don’t yet know enough to make any judgments.

That isnt quite the case in Portland at the present, is it?

Nor are they unidentfied based on the arm patches that are quite visible jn the videos.

I would grant you if this was happening in any normal jurisdiction (Albuquerque, Denver, Oakland) your point would be taken a little more seriously. Apparently you either are unaware of the issues of Portland in particular over the last three weeks, are unaware of the previous 'autonomous' movement in Seattle (or support that), or thjnk it fjne and dandy if a local government abdicates governance to those types.

You do a fantastic job of removing those very pertinent issues from the table in your rush yo castigate a reservation of judgement.

I also did a pretty fantastic job elucidating the hypocrisy of *some* people around here

Actually, I really don’t care at the moment to engage with anyone and am just venting a bit. Have a nice day!

(07-18-2020 03:11 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 10:04 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 09:38 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I can’t wait until masked and unidentified federal agents start grabbing conservative protestors during a Biden administration and the folks around here are asking for the details about what the protestors were doing and arguing that we don’t yet know enough to make any judgments.

That isnt quite the case in Portland at the present, is it?

Nor are they unidentfied based on the arm patches that are quite visible jn the videos.

I would grant you if this was happening in any normal jurisdiction (Albuquerque, Denver, Oakland) your point would be taken a little more seriously. Apparently you either are unaware of the issues of Portland in particular over the last three weeks, are unaware of the previous 'autonomous' movement in Seattle (or support that), or thjnk it fjne and dandy if a local government abdicates governance to those types.

You do a fantastic job of removing those very pertinent issues from the table in your rush yo castigate a reservation of judgement.

I also did a pretty fantastic job elucidating the hypocrisy of *some* people around here

Actually, I really don’t care at the moment to engage with anyone and am just venting a bit. Have a nice day!

Throw a rock and run away. No wonder you are so highly respected.

portland

Around 1:30 a.m., city police declared an unlawful assembly and told demonstrators to leave, police said.

Police said they moved in to disperse the crowd and arrested several people who didn't leave. Officers faced "projectiles such as glass bottles, rocks and broken pieces of metal from fencing," police said.

By 2:10 a.m., several hundred people returned to the area, and Portland police again dispersed them, arresting several more,

(07-18-2020 02:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 02:15 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 02:05 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 01:58 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 01:34 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Perhaps you should re-read the post I commented on, my comment to that, and *then* your 'everything and the kitchen sink' fairly radical expansion of my comment above.

Funny that your ***** session with Hambone has you complaining of the exact, same, expansion that you just did above. Jeezus fing Krist.

And yes, too fing bad the feds decide to enforce Federal law. Bummer. I assume the concept of dual sovereign kind of doesnt quite register at your end.

Obviously my post was in reference to these tactics in Portland bng carried out elsewhere - if the Feds want to come and stand guard of their courthouses, so be it. But we’re talking about them rounding up citizens in unmarked vans, outside of their facilities.

So the only role Federal authorities should undrtake is defense to prevent breaking of Federal law. Got it
Once the act is committed there should be nothing but local apprehension efforts. Sounds like a smashing **** up of a time

Hate to tell you the jurisdiction that z Fed can arrest detain or apprehend is..... checks notes... the entire jurisdiction of the United States. Shall we change that as well?

Again, I am criticizing their methods - stop moving the goal posts.

'Moving goal posts'? Well, who first mentioned that they are only okey dokey with the Feds 'stand[ing] guard at their courthouse? Well.... (checks notes) ... It seemed to be *you*.

I guess I shouldnt fing respond to *your* explicit comments. That could get real fun.

Quote: If they had a warrant, clearly identified themselves, informed the person they were being arrested and what crime they were being arrested for, and didn’t throw them into an unmarked van, I don’t see the issue. But the Feds in Portland did the exact opposite of each of those things.

Arguing against this means you support those tactics, you get that, right?

No police official needs a 'warrant' for a detention. Strike 1.

The photos and videos I have seen have both 'POLICE' on the front *and* very visible DHS shoulder markings. Strike 2.

When one is stopped or detained, there is zero constitutional authority for *anyone* to denote what you are being stopped for. There is plenty of authority for people to be informed of what they are being arrested for. Strike 3.

There havent been any charges asserted. There have been no arrests. Strike 4.

There is no authority that says officers of any sort *must* ride around in a vehicle marked "Police'. Strike 5.

So, when you get off your rhetorical flourishes you just might see that you have lots of them there.

Based on the videos I have seen, my advice to actual protesters is not to dress completely in black, wear a black hood, and wear a black face covering. My guess is that most of the shitbirds violating federal law are not doing that wearing pink floral Hawaiian print shirts, bright green baseball caps, and 'Biden 2020' bandanas.

If one wants to protest legally, one shouldnt necessarily dress like a fing combat ninja --- my other guess is that real and valid protesters just *might* do so in distinctive clothing --- that is unless they either want to be detained, or if they actually want to give sub rosa assistance to the vandals.

Now getting back to your point --- none of the issues that you are screaming about are illegal, or unconstitutional. If, and this is a big if mind you, the feds are truly doing a for ***** and giggles 'lets drive around, pick up some random dude, detain him, make him **** his pants, because we *can* do that' --- I might be persuaded that the actions are wrong. Your talking points are immaterial to that, they are superfluous in fact.

If the cops are actually stopping people with a real probable cause for detainment, then I will probably lean the other way than I noted in the above paragraph.

I have seen nothing to indicate which one of the two ways noted above this leans --- accordingly I will make my opinion on more cogent facts.

But again, just so there is no fing mistake --- your bullet points above, while nice and juicy in the rhetorical sense, and simply non-germane to to the issue.

If you can get back to me on any of the above being 'outside the law', then add that to the mix.

And, I really hate to tell you, the videos that I see will absolutely make wearing your 'ninja black street fighter' costume to a protest problematic when some asshat in a similar 'ninja black street commando' outfit breaks Federal law. Bummer.

This is a similar rehash of many other issues we have gone back and forth on.

You defend the actions by focusing on the legality of the matter, when I am not specifically criticizing the matter for being legal or illegal.

I’m commenting on whether it is the correct thing to be doing, is troubling, etc. As I said, you did a really quick about face on supporting these actions by the Feds. You’re now embracing this technique as a way to change the public’s behavior.

I really don’t think federal, or even state, law enforcement officials should be detaining citizens like this unless there is an abundantly compelling reason to - and given that the guy videoed wasn’t even technically arrested, this is worrying. How quickly a states’ rights libertarian like yourself is willing to embrace federal agents using these scare tactics is also worrying.

(07-18-2020 03:59 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  portland

Around 1:30 a.m., city police declared an unlawful assembly and told demonstrators to leave, police said.

Police said they moved in to disperse the crowd and arrested several people who didn't leave. Officers faced "projectiles such as glass bottles, rocks and broken pieces of metal from fencing," police said.

By 2:10 a.m., several hundred people returned to the area, and Portland police again dispersed them, arresting several more,

Yes, this is why the Trump Admin has sent in agents. These types of protests, which have routinely gotten destructive, have been going on for a while.

There’s no great answer to this, given our constitutional rights and the fact that you can’t proactively arrest people because they might cause damage.

But the difficulty of the situation doesn’t mean we need police basically kidnapping people because of how they’re dressed. If they want to start questioning or detaining them in the street, in public view, that’s a whole different ball game - but that video showed federal agents disappear someone who wasn’t charged of a crime. It wreaks of secret police bull****.

(07-18-2020 04:05 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 02:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 02:15 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 02:05 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 01:58 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Obviously my post was in reference to these tactics in Portland bng carried out elsewhere - if the Feds want to come and stand guard of their courthouses, so be it. But we’re talking about them rounding up citizens in unmarked vans, outside of their facilities.

So the only role Federal authorities should undrtake is defense to prevent breaking of Federal law. Got it
Once the act is committed there should be nothing but local apprehension efforts. Sounds like a smashing **** up of a time

Hate to tell you the jurisdiction that z Fed can arrest detain or apprehend is..... checks notes... the entire jurisdiction of the United States. Shall we change that as well?

Again, I am criticizing their methods - stop moving the goal posts.

'Moving goal posts'? Well, who first mentioned that they are only okey dokey with the Feds 'stand[ing] guard at their courthouse? Well.... (checks notes) ... It seemed to be *you*.

I guess I shouldnt fing respond to *your* explicit comments. That could get real fun.

Quote: If they had a warrant, clearly identified themselves, informed the person they were being arrested and what crime they were being arrested for, and didn’t throw them into an unmarked van, I don’t see the issue. But the Feds in Portland did the exact opposite of each of those things.

Arguing against this means you support those tactics, you get that, right?

No police official needs a 'warrant' for a detention. Strike 1.

The photos and videos I have seen have both 'POLICE' on the front *and* very visible DHS shoulder markings. Strike 2.

When one is stopped or detained, there is zero constitutional authority for *anyone* to denote what you are being stopped for. There is plenty of authority for people to be informed of what they are being arrested for. Strike 3.

There havent been any charges asserted. There have been no arrests. Strike 4.

There is no authority that says officers of any sort *must* ride around in a vehicle marked "Police'. Strike 5.

So, when you get off your rhetorical flourishes you just might see that you have lots of them there.

Based on the videos I have seen, my advice to actual protesters is not to dress completely in black, wear a black hood, and wear a black face covering. My guess is that most of the shitbirds violating federal law are not doing that wearing pink floral Hawaiian print shirts, bright green baseball caps, and 'Biden 2020' bandanas.

If one wants to protest legally, one shouldnt necessarily dress like a fing combat ninja --- my other guess is that real and valid protesters just *might* do so in distinctive clothing --- that is unless they either want to be detained, or if they actually want to give sub rosa assistance to the vandals.

Now getting back to your point --- none of the issues that you are screaming about are illegal, or unconstitutional. If, and this is a big if mind you, the feds are truly doing a for ***** and giggles 'lets drive around, pick up some random dude, detain him, make him **** his pants, because we *can* do that' --- I might be persuaded that the actions are wrong. Your talking points are immaterial to that, they are superfluous in fact.

If the cops are actually stopping people with a real probable cause for detainment, then I will probably lean the other way than I noted in the above paragraph.

I have seen nothing to indicate which one of the two ways noted above this leans --- accordingly I will make my opinion on more cogent facts.

But again, just so there is no fing mistake --- your bullet points above, while nice and juicy in the rhetorical sense, and simply non-germane to to the issue.

If you can get back to me on any of the above being 'outside the law', then add that to the mix.

And, I really hate to tell you, the videos that I see will absolutely make wearing your 'ninja black street fighter' costume to a protest problematic when some asshat in a similar 'ninja black street commando' outfit breaks Federal law. Bummer.

This is a similar rehash of many other issues we have gone back and forth on.

You defend the actions by focusing on the legality of the matter, when I am not specifically criticizing the matter for being legal or illegal.

So, what is wrong with the Feds detaining people dressed like people who have committed a crime? That action is undertaken literally thousands of times a day across just about every jurisdiction.

You are going epileptic on this.

If some asshat dressed in black commits a Federal beef, I dont have any issue with either Federal enforcement of a criminal statute, or them detaining people with sufficient probable cause. My advice to those people who 'protest' as ninja commando warriors, is that when someone dressed like the same ninja commando warrior commits a crime, be prepared to be stopped, or detained for a couple of hours.

If I go to a street gathering where I know that middle aged fat bozos dressed in crappy cargo shorts and hawaiian print shirts and toting semi-auto rifles may very well commit criminal acts, then I can only really blame myself for going to that function in my hawaiian shirt and crappy cargo shorts.

Apparently that doesnt have much grounding in lad world.

Quote:I’m commenting on whether it is the correct thing to be doing, is troubling, etc. As I said, you did a really quick about face on supporting these actions by the Feds. You’re now embracing this technique as a way to change the public’s behavior.

I am noting a reason why it may be occurring. That is, noting items that may have (most likely have) escaped your laser like focus in favor of rhetorical flourishes.

Again, if there are oodles (or only two) of cars full of DHS officers joyriding around, slamming beers, and saying 'hey lets roust some random dude for no reason', then your points might have traction.

If they are actually detaining people because they fit the description of someone who violated Federal law, I probably dont have an issue. If the person being picked up is dressed in urban ninja commando balck from head to toe, and the description of a perp is that, then bummer. Because, why else do you head to your local Portland downtown block party in these days dressed that way? To be cool? Fashionista? I would hazard a guess that those sporting the 'black wall of ninja' just might do so to give cover to the shitbirds who do do something. That is their choice to do so. They are free to do so. And bummer, too fing bad their might be a cop asking them questions about that if/when they match the description of a shitbird.

That doesnt seem to punch through your rhetoric though.

Quote: I really don’t think federal, or even state, law enforcement officials should be detaining citizens like this unless there is an abundantly compelling reason to -

I guess matching a description of person committing a criminal act does not rise to a 'compelling reason' in your worldview.

As I noted before, give me facts on the background of the stop. That should be determinative.

Quote:and given that the guy videoed wasn’t even technically arrested, this is worrying.

Lmfao. I think it pretty fing awesome he wasnt arrested myself. But to a guy that doesnt seem to understand the basic differences between a detention and an arrest in the first place, I can understand your rapid shift to 'a detention is baaaaaaaadddd.'

Quote:How quickly a states’ rights libertarian like yourself is willing to embrace federal agents using these scare tactics is also worrying.

Well at least since I dont try to raise the rhetoric (make that mischaracterized rhetoric) meter to an 11 shows at least a modicum of difference between your kneejerk reaction speed and that of myself.

(07-18-2020 04:45 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 04:05 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 02:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 02:15 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 02:05 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  So the only role Federal authorities should undrtake is defense to prevent breaking of Federal law. Got it
Once the act is committed there should be nothing but local apprehension efforts. Sounds like a smashing **** up of a time

Hate to tell you the jurisdiction that z Fed can arrest detain or apprehend is..... checks notes... the entire jurisdiction of the United States. Shall we change that as well?

Again, I am criticizing their methods - stop moving the goal posts.

'Moving goal posts'? Well, who first mentioned that they are only okey dokey with the Feds 'stand[ing] guard at their courthouse? Well.... (checks notes) ... It seemed to be *you*.

I guess I shouldnt fing respond to *your* explicit comments. That could get real fun.

Quote: If they had a warrant, clearly identified themselves, informed the person they were being arrested and what crime they were being arrested for, and didn’t throw them into an unmarked van, I don’t see the issue. But the Feds in Portland did the exact opposite of each of those things.

Arguing against this means you support those tactics, you get that, right?

No police official needs a 'warrant' for a detention. Strike 1.

The photos and videos I have seen have both 'POLICE' on the front *and* very visible DHS shoulder markings. Strike 2.

When one is stopped or detained, there is zero constitutional authority for *anyone* to denote what you are being stopped for. There is plenty of authority for people to be informed of what they are being arrested for. Strike 3.

There havent been any charges asserted. There have been no arrests. Strike 4.

There is no authority that says officers of any sort *must* ride around in a vehicle marked "Police'. Strike 5.

So, when you get off your rhetorical flourishes you just might see that you have lots of them there.

Based on the videos I have seen, my advice to actual protesters is not to dress completely in black, wear a black hood, and wear a black face covering. My guess is that most of the shitbirds violating federal law are not doing that wearing pink floral Hawaiian print shirts, bright green baseball caps, and 'Biden 2020' bandanas.

If one wants to protest legally, one shouldnt necessarily dress like a fing combat ninja --- my other guess is that real and valid protesters just *might* do so in distinctive clothing --- that is unless they either want to be detained, or if they actually want to give sub rosa assistance to the vandals.

Now getting back to your point --- none of the issues that you are screaming about are illegal, or unconstitutional. If, and this is a big if mind you, the feds are truly doing a for ***** and giggles 'lets drive around, pick up some random dude, detain him, make him **** his pants, because we *can* do that' --- I might be persuaded that the actions are wrong. Your talking points are immaterial to that, they are superfluous in fact.

If the cops are actually stopping people with a real probable cause for detainment, then I will probably lean the other way than I noted in the above paragraph.

I have seen nothing to indicate which one of the two ways noted above this leans --- accordingly I will make my opinion on more cogent facts.

But again, just so there is no fing mistake --- your bullet points above, while nice and juicy in the rhetorical sense, and simply non-germane to to the issue.

If you can get back to me on any of the above being 'outside the law', then add that to the mix.

And, I really hate to tell you, the videos that I see will absolutely make wearing your 'ninja black street fighter' costume to a protest problematic when some asshat in a similar 'ninja black street commando' outfit breaks Federal law. Bummer.

This is a similar rehash of many other issues we have gone back and forth on.

You defend the actions by focusing on the legality of the matter, when I am not specifically criticizing the matter for being legal or illegal.

So, what is wrong with the Feds detaining people dressed like people who have committed a crime? That action is undertaken literally thousands of times a day across just about every jurisdiction.

You are going epileptic on this.

If some asshat dressed in black commits a Federal beef, I dont have any issue with either Federal enforcement of a criminal statute, or them detaining people with sufficient probable cause. My advice to those people who 'protest' as ninja commando warriors, is that when someone dressed like the same ninja commando warrior commits a crime, be prepared to be stopped, or detained for a couple of hours.

If I go to a street gathering where I know that middle aged fat bozos dressed in crappy cargo shorts and hawaiian print shirts and toting semi-auto rifles may very well commit criminal acts, then I can only really blame myself for going to that function in my hawaiian shirt and crappy cargo shorts.

Apparently that doesnt have much grounding in lad world.

Quote:I’m commenting on whether it is the correct thing to be doing, is troubling, etc. As I said, you did a really quick about face on supporting these actions by the Feds. You’re now embracing this technique as a way to change the public’s behavior.

I am noting a reason why it may be occurring. That is, noting items that may have (most likely have) escaped your laser like focus in favor of rhetorical flourishes.

Again, if there are oodles (or only two) of cars full of DHS officers joyriding around, slamming beers, and saying 'hey lets roust some random dude for no reason', then your points might have traction.

If they are actually detaining people because they fit the description of someone who violated Federal law, I probably dont have an issue. If the person being picked up is dressed in urban ninja commando balck from head to toe, and the description of a perp is that, then bummer. Because, why else do you head to your local Portland downtown block party in these days dressed that way? To be cool? Fashionista? I would hazard a guess that those sporting the 'black wall of ninja' just might do so to give cover to the shitbirds who do do something. That is their choice to do so. They are free to do so. And bummer, too fing bad their might be a cop asking them questions about that if/when they match the description of a shitbird.

That doesnt seem to punch through your rhetoric though.

Quote: I really don’t think federal, or even state, law enforcement officials should be detaining citizens like this unless there is an abundantly compelling reason to -

I guess matching a description of person committing a criminal act does not rise to a 'compelling reason' in your worldview.

As I noted before, give me facts on the background of the stop. That should be determinative.

Quote:and given that the guy videoed wasn’t even technically arrested, this is worrying.

Lmfao. I think it pretty fing awesome he wasnt arrested myself. But to a guy that doesnt seem to understand the basic differences between a detention and an arrest in the first place, I can understand your rapid shift to 'a detention is baaaaaaaadddd.'

Quote:How quickly a states’ rights libertarian like yourself is willing to embrace federal agents using these scare tactics is also worrying.

Well at least since I dont try to raise the rhetoric (make that mischaracterized rhetoric) meter to an 11 shows at least a modicum of difference between your kneejerk reaction speed and that of myself.

Again, you’re missing the issue, intentionally. It is with how they detained the guy - they threw him into an unmarked van, without verbally identifying themselves or why he was being detained.

(07-18-2020 04:54 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 04:45 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 04:05 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 02:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 02:15 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Again, I am criticizing their methods - stop moving the goal posts.

'Moving goal posts'? Well, who first mentioned that they are only okey dokey with the Feds 'stand[ing] guard at their courthouse? Well.... (checks notes) ... It seemed to be *you*.

I guess I shouldnt fing respond to *your* explicit comments. That could get real fun.

Quote: If they had a warrant, clearly identified themselves, informed the person they were being arrested and what crime they were being arrested for, and didn’t throw them into an unmarked van, I don’t see the issue. But the Feds in Portland did the exact opposite of each of those things.

Arguing against this means you support those tactics, you get that, right?

No police official needs a 'warrant' for a detention. Strike 1.

The photos and videos I have seen have both 'POLICE' on the front *and* very visible DHS shoulder markings. Strike 2.

When one is stopped or detained, there is zero constitutional authority for *anyone* to denote what you are being stopped for. There is plenty of authority for people to be informed of what they are being arrested for. Strike 3.

There havent been any charges asserted. There have been no arrests. Strike 4.

There is no authority that says officers of any sort *must* ride around in a vehicle marked "Police'. Strike 5.

So, when you get off your rhetorical flourishes you just might see that you have lots of them there.

Based on the videos I have seen, my advice to actual protesters is not to dress completely in black, wear a black hood, and wear a black face covering. My guess is that most of the shitbirds violating federal law are not doing that wearing pink floral Hawaiian print shirts, bright green baseball caps, and 'Biden 2020' bandanas.

If one wants to protest legally, one shouldnt necessarily dress like a fing combat ninja --- my other guess is that real and valid protesters just *might* do so in distinctive clothing --- that is unless they either want to be detained, or if they actually want to give sub rosa assistance to the vandals.

Now getting back to your point --- none of the issues that you are screaming about are illegal, or unconstitutional. If, and this is a big if mind you, the feds are truly doing a for ***** and giggles 'lets drive around, pick up some random dude, detain him, make him **** his pants, because we *can* do that' --- I might be persuaded that the actions are wrong. Your talking points are immaterial to that, they are superfluous in fact.

If the cops are actually stopping people with a real probable cause for detainment, then I will probably lean the other way than I noted in the above paragraph.

I have seen nothing to indicate which one of the two ways noted above this leans --- accordingly I will make my opinion on more cogent facts.

But again, just so there is no fing mistake --- your bullet points above, while nice and juicy in the rhetorical sense, and simply non-germane to to the issue.

If you can get back to me on any of the above being 'outside the law', then add that to the mix.

And, I really hate to tell you, the videos that I see will absolutely make wearing your 'ninja black street fighter' costume to a protest problematic when some asshat in a similar 'ninja black street commando' outfit breaks Federal law. Bummer.

This is a similar rehash of many other issues we have gone back and forth on.

You defend the actions by focusing on the legality of the matter, when I am not specifically criticizing the matter for being legal or illegal.

So, what is wrong with the Feds detaining people dressed like people who have committed a crime? That action is undertaken literally thousands of times a day across just about every jurisdiction.

You are going epileptic on this.

If some asshat dressed in black commits a Federal beef, I dont have any issue with either Federal enforcement of a criminal statute, or them detaining people with sufficient probable cause. My advice to those people who 'protest' as ninja commando warriors, is that when someone dressed like the same ninja commando warrior commits a crime, be prepared to be stopped, or detained for a couple of hours.

If I go to a street gathering where I know that middle aged fat bozos dressed in crappy cargo shorts and hawaiian print shirts and toting semi-auto rifles may very well commit criminal acts, then I can only really blame myself for going to that function in my hawaiian shirt and crappy cargo shorts.

Apparently that doesnt have much grounding in lad world.

Quote:I’m commenting on whether it is the correct thing to be doing, is troubling, etc. As I said, you did a really quick about face on supporting these actions by the Feds. You’re now embracing this technique as a way to change the public’s behavior.

I am noting a reason why it may be occurring. That is, noting items that may have (most likely have) escaped your laser like focus in favor of rhetorical flourishes.

Again, if there are oodles (or only two) of cars full of DHS officers joyriding around, slamming beers, and saying 'hey lets roust some random dude for no reason', then your points might have traction.

If they are actually detaining people because they fit the description of someone who violated Federal law, I probably dont have an issue. If the person being picked up is dressed in urban ninja commando balck from head to toe, and the description of a perp is that, then bummer. Because, why else do you head to your local Portland downtown block party in these days dressed that way? To be cool? Fashionista? I would hazard a guess that those sporting the 'black wall of ninja' just might do so to give cover to the shitbirds who do do something. That is their choice to do so. They are free to do so. And bummer, too fing bad their might be a cop asking them questions about that if/when they match the description of a shitbird.

That doesnt seem to punch through your rhetoric though.

Quote: I really don’t think federal, or even state, law enforcement officials should be detaining citizens like this unless there is an abundantly compelling reason to -

I guess matching a description of person committing a criminal act does not rise to a 'compelling reason' in your worldview.

As I noted before, give me facts on the background of the stop. That should be determinative.

Quote:and given that the guy videoed wasn’t even technically arrested, this is worrying.

Lmfao. I think it pretty fing awesome he wasnt arrested myself. But to a guy that doesnt seem to understand the basic differences between a detention and an arrest in the first place, I can understand your rapid shift to 'a detention is baaaaaaaadddd.'

Quote:How quickly a states’ rights libertarian like yourself is willing to embrace federal agents using these scare tactics is also worrying.

Well at least since I dont try to raise the rhetoric (make that mischaracterized rhetoric) meter to an 11 shows at least a modicum of difference between your kneejerk reaction speed and that of myself.

Again, you’re missing the issue, intentionally. It is with how they detained the guy - they threw him into an unmarked van, without verbally identifying themselves or why he was being detained.

Funny, I got detained in that manner once. The van was a car, and it was marked. Spent thirty minutes in the car, was released, and told gruffly to 'get the **** away from here.' Never was told exactly *why* *I* was detained, but itt was at the edge of a big fight, so I kind of understood the detention.

And funny, I guess that if was suited up as super ninja night commando, in a situation where there had been 50 nights of violence directed at Federal buildings in the area by fellow ninja commandos, I could probably figure out why the popo might want to talk with me. Apparently the progressives cant complete that chain of logic.

Maybe I should get my knickers in a twist over that horrible injustice.

The horrors!!!! An UNMARKED van!!! (an suv actually had you looked at the tape). The sheer brutality.

As for the 'not identifying themselves' --- well again your rhetoric seems to outpace the facts. The officers are clearly marked as 'Police' and clearly marked as DHS with shoulder patches.

So looking at the tape, do you think ninja wannabe would have stopped and talked to any officers? Doesnt look so to me -- I seem to recall on the tape them saying 'stop', but he kept bolting.

So we have the horrible injustice of an 'unmarked car', the horrible injustice of people in uniforms clearly marked as police and marked as specific branch not saying 'hey mr ninja warrior, we are the popo', and the awful and horrific act of him being detained without telling him why.

And, once again, I will be more than happy to assess the specifics of this case in an objective manner -- that is whether the LE was 'joy riding and detaining' or what the particular facts are in this case. None which seem to be in evidence.

And apologies -- I have a chance to play with a road grader; so that takes priority to dealing with the rhetorical flapping for a bit.....

(07-18-2020 04:54 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 04:45 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 04:05 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 02:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 02:15 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Again, I am criticizing their methods - stop moving the goal posts.

'Moving goal posts'? Well, who first mentioned that they are only okey dokey with the Feds 'stand[ing] guard at their courthouse? Well.... (checks notes) ... It seemed to be *you*.

I guess I shouldnt fing respond to *your* explicit comments. That could get real fun.

Quote: If they had a warrant, clearly identified themselves, informed the person they were being arrested and what crime they were being arrested for, and didn’t throw them into an unmarked van, I don’t see the issue. But the Feds in Portland did the exact opposite of each of those things.

Arguing against this means you support those tactics, you get that, right?

No police official needs a 'warrant' for a detention. Strike 1.

The photos and videos I have seen have both 'POLICE' on the front *and* very visible DHS shoulder markings. Strike 2.

When one is stopped or detained, there is zero constitutional authority for *anyone* to denote what you are being stopped for. There is plenty of authority for people to be informed of what they are being arrested for. Strike 3.

There havent been any charges asserted. There have been no arrests. Strike 4.

There is no authority that says officers of any sort *must* ride around in a vehicle marked "Police'. Strike 5.

So, when you get off your rhetorical flourishes you just might see that you have lots of them there.

Based on the videos I have seen, my advice to actual protesters is not to dress completely in black, wear a black hood, and wear a black face covering. My guess is that most of the shitbirds violating federal law are not doing that wearing pink floral Hawaiian print shirts, bright green baseball caps, and 'Biden 2020' bandanas.

If one wants to protest legally, one shouldnt necessarily dress like a fing combat ninja --- my other guess is that real and valid protesters just *might* do so in distinctive clothing --- that is unless they either want to be detained, or if they actually want to give sub rosa assistance to the vandals.

Now getting back to your point --- none of the issues that you are screaming about are illegal, or unconstitutional. If, and this is a big if mind you, the feds are truly doing a for ***** and giggles 'lets drive around, pick up some random dude, detain him, make him **** his pants, because we *can* do that' --- I might be persuaded that the actions are wrong. Your talking points are immaterial to that, they are superfluous in fact.

If the cops are actually stopping people with a real probable cause for detainment, then I will probably lean the other way than I noted in the above paragraph.

I have seen nothing to indicate which one of the two ways noted above this leans --- accordingly I will make my opinion on more cogent facts.

But again, just so there is no fing mistake --- your bullet points above, while nice and juicy in the rhetorical sense, and simply non-germane to to the issue.

If you can get back to me on any of the above being 'outside the law', then add that to the mix.

And, I really hate to tell you, the videos that I see will absolutely make wearing your 'ninja black street fighter' costume to a protest problematic when some asshat in a similar 'ninja black street commando' outfit breaks Federal law. Bummer.

This is a similar rehash of many other issues we have gone back and forth on.

You defend the actions by focusing on the legality of the matter, when I am not specifically criticizing the matter for being legal or illegal.

So, what is wrong with the Feds detaining people dressed like people who have committed a crime? That action is undertaken literally thousands of times a day across just about every jurisdiction.

You are going epileptic on this.

If some asshat dressed in black commits a Federal beef, I dont have any issue with either Federal enforcement of a criminal statute, or them detaining people with sufficient probable cause. My advice to those people who 'protest' as ninja commando warriors, is that when someone dressed like the same ninja commando warrior commits a crime, be prepared to be stopped, or detained for a couple of hours.

If I go to a street gathering where I know that middle aged fat bozos dressed in crappy cargo shorts and hawaiian print shirts and toting semi-auto rifles may very well commit criminal acts, then I can only really blame myself for going to that function in my hawaiian shirt and crappy cargo shorts.

Apparently that doesnt have much grounding in lad world.

Quote:I’m commenting on whether it is the correct thing to be doing, is troubling, etc. As I said, you did a really quick about face on supporting these actions by the Feds. You’re now embracing this technique as a way to change the public’s behavior.

I am noting a reason why it may be occurring. That is, noting items that may have (most likely have) escaped your laser like focus in favor of rhetorical flourishes.

Again, if there are oodles (or only two) of cars full of DHS officers joyriding around, slamming beers, and saying 'hey lets roust some random dude for no reason', then your points might have traction.

If they are actually detaining people because they fit the description of someone who violated Federal law, I probably dont have an issue. If the person being picked up is dressed in urban ninja commando balck from head to toe, and the description of a perp is that, then bummer. Because, why else do you head to your local Portland downtown block party in these days dressed that way? To be cool? Fashionista? I would hazard a guess that those sporting the 'black wall of ninja' just might do so to give cover to the shitbirds who do do something. That is their choice to do so. They are free to do so. And bummer, too fing bad their might be a cop asking them questions about that if/when they match the description of a shitbird.

That doesnt seem to punch through your rhetoric though.

Quote: I really don’t think federal, or even state, law enforcement officials should be detaining citizens like this unless there is an abundantly compelling reason to -

I guess matching a description of person committing a criminal act does not rise to a 'compelling reason' in your worldview.

As I noted before, give me facts on the background of the stop. That should be determinative.

Quote:and given that the guy videoed wasn’t even technically arrested, this is worrying.

Lmfao. I think it pretty fing awesome he wasnt arrested myself. But to a guy that doesnt seem to understand the basic differences between a detention and an arrest in the first place, I can understand your rapid shift to 'a detention is baaaaaaaadddd.'

Quote:How quickly a states’ rights libertarian like yourself is willing to embrace federal agents using these scare tactics is also worrying.

Well at least since I dont try to raise the rhetoric (make that mischaracterized rhetoric) meter to an 11 shows at least a modicum of difference between your kneejerk reaction speed and that of myself.

Again, you’re missing the issue, intentionally. It is with how they detained the guy - they threw him into an unmarked van, without verbally identifying themselves or why he was being detained.

And lad, no I am not missing the issue. If you noticed the fisking above is simply responses to your arm flapping. As for 'intentionally' -- FO.

(07-18-2020 05:25 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 04:54 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 04:45 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 04:05 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 02:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  'Moving goal posts'? Well, who first mentioned that they are only okey dokey with the Feds 'stand[ing] guard at their courthouse? Well.... (checks notes) ... It seemed to be *you*.

I guess I shouldnt fing respond to *your* explicit comments. That could get real fun.


No police official needs a 'warrant' for a detention. Strike 1.

The photos and videos I have seen have both 'POLICE' on the front *and* very visible DHS shoulder markings. Strike 2.

When one is stopped or detained, there is zero constitutional authority for *anyone* to denote what you are being stopped for. There is plenty of authority for people to be informed of what they are being arrested for. Strike 3.

There havent been any charges asserted. There have been no arrests. Strike 4.

There is no authority that says officers of any sort *must* ride around in a vehicle marked "Police'. Strike 5.

So, when you get off your rhetorical flourishes you just might see that you have lots of them there.

Based on the videos I have seen, my advice to actual protesters is not to dress completely in black, wear a black hood, and wear a black face covering. My guess is that most of the shitbirds violating federal law are not doing that wearing pink floral Hawaiian print shirts, bright green baseball caps, and 'Biden 2020' bandanas.

If one wants to protest legally, one shouldnt necessarily dress like a fing combat ninja --- my other guess is that real and valid protesters just *might* do so in distinctive clothing --- that is unless they either want to be detained, or if they actually want to give sub rosa assistance to the vandals.

Now getting back to your point --- none of the issues that you are screaming about are illegal, or unconstitutional. If, and this is a big if mind you, the feds are truly doing a for ***** and giggles 'lets drive around, pick up some random dude, detain him, make him **** his pants, because we *can* do that' --- I might be persuaded that the actions are wrong. Your talking points are immaterial to that, they are superfluous in fact.

If the cops are actually stopping people with a real probable cause for detainment, then I will probably lean the other way than I noted in the above paragraph.

I have seen nothing to indicate which one of the two ways noted above this leans --- accordingly I will make my opinion on more cogent facts.

But again, just so there is no fing mistake --- your bullet points above, while nice and juicy in the rhetorical sense, and simply non-germane to to the issue.

If you can get back to me on any of the above being 'outside the law', then add that to the mix.

And, I really hate to tell you, the videos that I see will absolutely make wearing your 'ninja black street fighter' costume to a protest problematic when some asshat in a similar 'ninja black street commando' outfit breaks Federal law. Bummer.

This is a similar rehash of many other issues we have gone back and forth on.

You defend the actions by focusing on the legality of the matter, when I am not specifically criticizing the matter for being legal or illegal.

So, what is wrong with the Feds detaining people dressed like people who have committed a crime? That action is undertaken literally thousands of times a day across just about every jurisdiction.

You are going epileptic on this.

If some asshat dressed in black commits a Federal beef, I dont have any issue with either Federal enforcement of a criminal statute, or them detaining people with sufficient probable cause. My advice to those people who 'protest' as ninja commando warriors, is that when someone dressed like the same ninja commando warrior commits a crime, be prepared to be stopped, or detained for a couple of hours.

If I go to a street gathering where I know that middle aged fat bozos dressed in crappy cargo shorts and hawaiian print shirts and toting semi-auto rifles may very well commit criminal acts, then I can only really blame myself for going to that function in my hawaiian shirt and crappy cargo shorts.

Apparently that doesnt have much grounding in lad world.

Quote:I’m commenting on whether it is the correct thing to be doing, is troubling, etc. As I said, you did a really quick about face on supporting these actions by the Feds. You’re now embracing this technique as a way to change the public’s behavior.

I am noting a reason why it may be occurring. That is, noting items that may have (most likely have) escaped your laser like focus in favor of rhetorical flourishes.

Again, if there are oodles (or only two) of cars full of DHS officers joyriding around, slamming beers, and saying 'hey lets roust some random dude for no reason', then your points might have traction.

If they are actually detaining people because they fit the description of someone who violated Federal law, I probably dont have an issue. If the person being picked up is dressed in urban ninja commando balck from head to toe, and the description of a perp is that, then bummer. Because, why else do you head to your local Portland downtown block party in these days dressed that way? To be cool? Fashionista? I would hazard a guess that those sporting the 'black wall of ninja' just might do so to give cover to the shitbirds who do do something. That is their choice to do so. They are free to do so. And bummer, too fing bad their might be a cop asking them questions about that if/when they match the description of a shitbird.

That doesnt seem to punch through your rhetoric though.

Quote: I really don’t think federal, or even state, law enforcement officials should be detaining citizens like this unless there is an abundantly compelling reason to -

I guess matching a description of person committing a criminal act does not rise to a 'compelling reason' in your worldview.

As I noted before, give me facts on the background of the stop. That should be determinative.

Quote:and given that the guy videoed wasn’t even technically arrested, this is worrying.

Lmfao. I think it pretty fing awesome he wasnt arrested myself. But to a guy that doesnt seem to understand the basic differences between a detention and an arrest in the first place, I can understand your rapid shift to 'a detention is baaaaaaaadddd.'

Quote:How quickly a states’ rights libertarian like yourself is willing to embrace federal agents using these scare tactics is also worrying.

Well at least since I dont try to raise the rhetoric (make that mischaracterized rhetoric) meter to an 11 shows at least a modicum of difference between your kneejerk reaction speed and that of myself.

Again, you’re missing the issue, intentionally. It is with how they detained the guy - they threw him into an unmarked van, without verbally identifying themselves or why he was being detained.

And lad, no I am not missing the issue. If you noticed the fisking above is simply responses to your arm flapping. As for 'intentionally' -- FO.

Again, the speed with which you have fully supported federal agents pulling a citizen into an unmarked vehicle to be detained in a federal facility without any charge or reason is impressive. It seems like secret police tactics employed by Federal forces are A-OK in Tanq’s libertarian utopia.

Just surprised by this - have a good evening.

(07-18-2020 06:08 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 05:25 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 04:54 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 04:45 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 04:05 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  This is a similar rehash of many other issues we have gone back and forth on.

You defend the actions by focusing on the legality of the matter, when I am not specifically criticizing the matter for being legal or illegal.

So, what is wrong with the Feds detaining people dressed like people who have committed a crime? That action is undertaken literally thousands of times a day across just about every jurisdiction.

You are going epileptic on this.

If some asshat dressed in black commits a Federal beef, I dont have any issue with either Federal enforcement of a criminal statute, or them detaining people with sufficient probable cause. My advice to those people who 'protest' as ninja commando warriors, is that when someone dressed like the same ninja commando warrior commits a crime, be prepared to be stopped, or detained for a couple of hours.

If I go to a street gathering where I know that middle aged fat bozos dressed in crappy cargo shorts and hawaiian print shirts and toting semi-auto rifles may very well commit criminal acts, then I can only really blame myself for going to that function in my hawaiian shirt and crappy cargo shorts.

Apparently that doesnt have much grounding in lad world.

Quote:I’m commenting on whether it is the correct thing to be doing, is troubling, etc. As I said, you did a really quick about face on supporting these actions by the Feds. You’re now embracing this technique as a way to change the public’s behavior.

I am noting a reason why it may be occurring. That is, noting items that may have (most likely have) escaped your laser like focus in favor of rhetorical flourishes.

Again, if there are oodles (or only two) of cars full of DHS officers joyriding around, slamming beers, and saying 'hey lets roust some random dude for no reason', then your points might have traction.

If they are actually detaining people because they fit the description of someone who violated Federal law, I probably dont have an issue. If the person being picked up is dressed in urban ninja commando balck from head to toe, and the description of a perp is that, then bummer. Because, why else do you head to your local Portland downtown block party in these days dressed that way? To be cool? Fashionista? I would hazard a guess that those sporting the 'black wall of ninja' just might do so to give cover to the shitbirds who do do something. That is their choice to do so. They are free to do so. And bummer, too fing bad their might be a cop asking them questions about that if/when they match the description of a shitbird.

That doesnt seem to punch through your rhetoric though.

Quote: I really don’t think federal, or even state, law enforcement officials should be detaining citizens like this unless there is an abundantly compelling reason to -

I guess matching a description of person committing a criminal act does not rise to a 'compelling reason' in your worldview.

As I noted before, give me facts on the background of the stop. That should be determinative.

Quote:and given that the guy videoed wasn’t even technically arrested, this is worrying.

Lmfao. I think it pretty fing awesome he wasnt arrested myself. But to a guy that doesnt seem to understand the basic differences between a detention and an arrest in the first place, I can understand your rapid shift to 'a detention is baaaaaaaadddd.'

Quote:How quickly a states’ rights libertarian like yourself is willing to embrace federal agents using these scare tactics is also worrying.

Well at least since I dont try to raise the rhetoric (make that mischaracterized rhetoric) meter to an 11 shows at least a modicum of difference between your kneejerk reaction speed and that of myself.

Again, you’re missing the issue, intentionally. It is with how they detained the guy - they threw him into an unmarked van, without verbally identifying themselves or why he was being detained.

And lad, no I am not missing the issue. If you noticed the fisking above is simply responses to your arm flapping. As for 'intentionally' -- FO.

Again, the speed with which you have fully supported federal agents pulling a citizen into an unmarked vehicle to be detained in a federal facility without any charge or reason is impressive. It seems like secret police tactics employed by Federal forces are A-OK in Tanq’s libertarian utopia.

Just surprised by this - have a good evening.

In short, I have zero problems with a 'detention' (as the term is understood in the law) with sufficient probable cause.

On the other hand, all you can do is flap your wings, all without apparently any understanding with such concept as it is understood.

And given that probable cause, the use of an unmarked vehicle is absolutely ungermane to the the issue.

And given probable cause, such detention does not need a charge as long as the person is released. As in this case, surprise, surprise, fing surprise.

And, further, under detention (as noted for a limited time), there is no requisite for 'saying what any charge is', let alone an officer even talking to you.

Had you any fing clue as to the rationale behind the distinction between a 'stop', a 'detention', and an 'arrest' ---- you might have a fing clue. You dont., and...... you dont.

Any and all of these actions occur literally thousands of times a day. Where is your outrage at *any* of those? Funny that, there is none. Gee, imagine that.

You want to convince me of your point of view? Then tell me what the officers had been told, and whom they might be looking for, if at all. That is the only fing germane point. Jeezus fing krist on kracker.

I have tried to tutor you on the underlying principles, and the underlying realities. But all you can do is jump up and fing down and scream 'Gestapo', all without any background on the specific issue, nor apparently any fing clue on that the items that you scream like a stuck pig about are absolutely non-germane. Again, jeezus fing krist on a kracker.

I mean, you try to dig marrow out that bone using points that are amazingly factually bereft, but apparently make up for them in rhetorical weight. Awesome job there lad, just smashing. You done us proud once again.

Finally, as fpr 'fully supported,, you actually mean 'how dare I not support your fact bereft characterization lock stock and two smoking barrels'. Note where I state the germane issues -- none of which are shown either way. Yes, how dare I not support your attack on a situation that, from your set of facts on which you base your cry, any single point of crying that you make doesnt differ or deviate from any norm that exist in many detentions in this nation in the slightest. That is, excepting the detainee was a ninja commando warrior at a Portland protest.

I think I may have found one thing we can all unite around at the Portland protests/riots:

I think the name is pretty catchy.

Quote: Hundreds of people gather nightly in streets and parks, where volunteers distribute donated bullhorns, hand sanitizer and medical supplies and operate Riot Ribs, a sidewalk barbecue providing free ribs, hamburgers, hot dogs and fixings.

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/sto...ral-agents

(07-19-2020 11:19 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I think I may have found one thing we can all unite around at the Portland protests/riots:

I think the name is pretty catchy.

Quote: Hundreds of people gather nightly in streets and parks, where volunteers distribute donated bullhorns, hand sanitizer and medical supplies and operate Riot Ribs, a sidewalk barbecue providing free ribs, hamburgers, hot dogs and fixings.

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/sto...ral-agents

All my favorite health foods.

Do I need to provide proof that I burned or looted something, or will just a fist in the air suffice?

Fox News poll (taken July 12-15)

Does candidate have mental soundness to serve effectively as President?

Yes He Does - Biden 47 percent, Trump 43 percent
No He Doesn't - Biden 39 percent, Trump 51 percent

Honestly, not a ringing endorsement for either guy, but those drumming the Biden is senile drum are going to be soundly disappointed on November 3rd.

(07-18-2020 03:41 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 03:11 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 10:04 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 09:38 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I can’t wait until masked and unidentified federal agents start grabbing conservative protestors during a Biden administration and the folks around here are asking for the details about what the protestors were doing and arguing that we don’t yet know enough to make any judgments.

That isnt quite the case in Portland at the present, is it?

Nor are they unidentfied based on the arm patches that are quite visible jn the videos.

I would grant you if this was happening in any normal jurisdiction (Albuquerque, Denver, Oakland) your point would be taken a little more seriously. Apparently you either are unaware of the issues of Portland in particular over the last three weeks, are unaware of the previous 'autonomous' movement in Seattle (or support that), or thjnk it fjne and dandy if a local government abdicates governance to those types.

You do a fantastic job of removing those very pertinent issues from the table in your rush yo castigate a reservation of judgement.

I also did a pretty fantastic job elucidating the hypocrisy of *some* people around here

Actually, I really don’t care at the moment to engage with anyone and am just venting a bit. Have a nice day!

Throw a rock and run away. No wonder you are so highly respected.

Better than being an ******* all the time, which is what would happen if I hung out here right now. Others could learn from my example.

(07-18-2020 03:59 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  portland

Around 1:30 a.m., city police declared an unlawful assembly and told demonstrators to leave, police said.

Police said they moved in to disperse the crowd and arrested several people who didn't leave. Officers faced "projectiles such as glass bottles, rocks and broken pieces of metal from fencing," police said.

By 2:10 a.m., several hundred people returned to the area, and Portland police again dispersed them, arresting several more,

What made the assembly unlawful? Is there a curfew in place or permit requirement? Or did the police randomly decide that it was "unlawful"? Genuinely curious, not trying to rake muck with this one.

Tanq tells Lad, "You are going epileptic on this." Let us compare...

Tanq said:

(07-18-2020 02:05 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Sounds like a smashing **** up of a time

(07-18-2020 02:42 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  I guess I shouldnt fing respond to *your* explicit comments. That could get real fun.

(07-18-2020 04:45 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  If, and this is a big if mind you, the feds are truly doing a for ***** and giggles 'lets drive around, pick up some random dude, detain him, make him **** his pants, because we *can* do that' --- I might be persuaded that the actions are wrong. Your talking points are immaterial to that, they are superfluous in fact.
...
But again, just so there is no fing mistake --- your bullet points above, while nice and juicy in the rhetorical sense, and simply non-germane to to the issue.

(07-18-2020 04:45 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  And bummer, too fing bad their might be a cop asking them questions about that if/when they match the description of a shitbird.

(07-18-2020 04:45 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Lmfao. I think it pretty fing awesome he wasnt arrested myself. But to a guy that doesnt seem to understand the basic differences between a detention and an arrest in the first place, I can understand your rapid shift to 'a detention is baaaaaaaadddd.'

(07-18-2020 05:25 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  As for 'intentionally' -- FO.

Lad said:

(07-18-2020 02:15 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Again, I am criticizing their methods - stop moving the goal posts.

(07-18-2020 04:05 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  If they had a warrant, clearly identified themselves, informed the person they were being arrested and what crime they were being arrested for, and didn’t throw them into an unmarked van, I don’t see the issue. But the Feds in Portland did the exact opposite of each of those things.

Arguing against this means you support those tactics, you get that, right?

(07-18-2020 02:15 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  This is a similar rehash of many other issues we have gone back and forth on.

You defend the actions by focusing on the legality of the matter, when I am not specifically criticizing the matter for being legal or illegal.

Quote:I’m commenting on whether it is the correct thing to be doing, is troubling, etc. As I said, you did a really quick about face on supporting these actions by the Feds. You’re now embracing this technique as a way to change the public’s behavior.

Quote: I really don’t think federal, or even state, law enforcement officials should be detaining citizens like this unless there is an abundantly compelling reason to -

Quote:and given that the guy videoed wasn’t even technically arrested, this is worrying.

Quote:How quickly a states’ rights libertarian like yourself is willing to embrace federal agents using these scare tactics is also worrying.

(07-18-2020 06:08 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Just surprised by this - have a good evening.

Someone does seem to be "epileptic" on this, but maybe you should look in the mirror and have a nice relaxing mug of tea afterward?

(07-18-2020 05:16 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Maybe I should get my knickers in a twist over that horrible injustice.

I see you, and I appreciate your efforts!

(07-19-2020 02:12 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 03:41 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 03:11 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 10:04 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-18-2020 09:38 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I can’t wait until masked and unidentified federal agents start grabbing conservative protestors during a Biden administration and the folks around here are asking for the details about what the protestors were doing and arguing that we don’t yet know enough to make any judgments.

That isnt quite the case in Portland at the present, is it?

Nor are they unidentfied based on the arm patches that are quite visible jn the videos.

I would grant you if this was happening in any normal jurisdiction (Albuquerque, Denver, Oakland) your point would be taken a little more seriously. Apparently you either are unaware of the issues of Portland in particular over the last three weeks, are unaware of the previous 'autonomous' movement in Seattle (or support that), or thjnk it fjne and dandy if a local government abdicates governance to those types.

You do a fantastic job of removing those very pertinent issues from the table in your rush yo castigate a reservation of judgement.

I also did a pretty fantastic job elucidating the hypocrisy of *some* people around here

Actually, I really don’t care at the moment to engage with anyone and am just venting a bit. Have a nice day!

Throw a rock and run away. No wonder you are so highly respected.

Better than being an ******* all the time, which is what would happen if I hung out here right now. Others could learn from my example.

Apparently not, especially after your roll on earning some major league douchebag points today and the throw a rock and run away mode yesterday. 3 posts, 2 of them nothing but ad homs.

Combined with your throw a rock and run the hell away mode yesterday you are on a real role model for restraint and civility there/here,