badgerx16 Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 Hey just think how lucky you all are living in the uk with a Nazi Royal Family .............. They're Canada's Royal family as well, you do know that don't you. And I'm a life long republican, so couldn't give a rat's arse that somebody found a video showing Edward VIII, a known nazi sympathiser, playing such games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 (edited) Never seen it so explain............. I think he means you like Cheesy Poofs, ( which BTW does NOT infer anything about your sexual orientation ), you insist on trying to bully people with the demand " Respect mah authoritah !", and always end an argument you are losing with the phrase "screw you guys, I'm going home". Probably also that you appear to be 8 years old. Edited 20 July, 2015 by badgerx16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 Thought you wanted a meaningful debate??...........guess not ....so do what the brits do best......run away and tell yourself how great you are So where is your 'meaningful debate' response to Verbal's post ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 (edited) Your rational debate stuff is going so well. You were just so right when you told us all that's what you wanted to have. The level of rational-ness in your posting has gone through the roof. Well done. What I like about you now is you've really taken to debating the issues, like a changed man. By no means are you just ham-fistedly typing in whatever infantile drivel enters your head in order to get some reaction and avoid engaging with any discussion point with anyone. Let's see how it's all going. 1. Simple abuse. 2% rational. I came in peace last night but said I would respond to any insults/windups etc. . Who the F*ck do you think you are to question my mental state??? OK you got the reaction from me you wanted..........will keep replying to you all the time you act like a c*nt . 2. Have a little pop at the UK, for the 347th time on this forum, using the same "small country" line as several times previously. 3% rational. MMMMM ........cant you find anything from North America.........small country, small minds [emoji38] 3. Basic wasteof typing. 1%: **** poor effort should have saved your time [emoji38] 4. Flailing about gibberish ranting desperate for attention, 0.5%: Hey just think how lucky you all are living in the uk with a Nazi Royal Family .............. 5. More flailing about gibberish. 2%. Thought you wanted a meaningful debate??...........guess not ....so do what the brits do best......run away and tell yourself how great you are [emoji38] I think it is the LOLing at the end of each post that elevate your arguments to the level of high level rational-ness. Edited 20 July, 2015 by CB Fry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 I came in peace last night but said I would respond to any insults/windups etc. . Who the F*ck do you think you are to question my mental state??? OK you got the reaction from me you wanted..........will keep replying to you all the time you act like a c*nt . I question the state of your mental health based on evidence of your abnormal behaviour on here - which I see shows no signs of abating. 42 Pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micky Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 Thought you wanted a meaningful debate??...........guess not ....so do what the brits do best......run away and tell yourself how great you are Fool. The Counted. Read. The officer is 'innocent'? http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/23/cleveland-officer-not-guilty-shot-137-times-police Bye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 Great resource Verbal. You would think that that one page alone would be enough to convince the most blinkered of people that reform is a must, wouldn't you. And yet it just goes on, and on, and on - the senseless killing. I've only checked out a few, but most appear to be unarmed at the time of the shooting as well. Whilst I find it absolutely abhorrent that supposedly intelligent people cannot see the destructive nature caused by their current love of weapons, I also find it immensely sad. I think I'm probably going to cease posting here for a while now. Having seen the current stats - I don't feel the need to justify my stance to Sarnia any further. Sad indeed. I got a clearer picture from the data and reading through some of the individual cases about how this mass killing works and why it's so ethnically skewed. It's not that individual US police officers are overtly racist, in the sense that they see a black man and feel an urgent need to shoot him. It's rather that their training is all about 'officer safety', and, deep down, they feel more threatened by a black man (and, occasionally, woman) than a white individual. Reading through the 'found innocent' tags, I noticed this innocence was based almost always on the claim of perceived threat. Of course, if you're brought up in a culture where black men are historically viewed, even by 'science' (such as eugenics and IQ testing), as more dangerous and/or more stupid, then it's a response with deep roots in racism but not with an overtly racist motive. This 'officer safety' principle has shifted somewhat in recent years, and in a way that has probably exacerbated the problem. As part of my day job, I did a close study of the minute-by-minute events during the Columbine High School massacre that took place in 1999. When the two shooters started killing school students, there was actually a police officer on the premises, and he returned fire. But he did so from outside the building, while almost all of the shooting was inside. When the city police arrived they also returned fire for a few brief moments, but again from outside building. In fact, all the cops were grouped around windows of the library, where the worst of the massacre happened (the shooters went around executing pupils who had taken refuge under the library desks). All the time this mass execution was happening, the police steadfastly refused to enter the building on the grounds of 'officer safety'. Having been to the school itself, I can tell you that the cops were virtually within whispering distance of the killers as they went about blasting the heads of their schoolmates. But they didn't enter the building - and then only as a SWAT team - until a full hour after the shooting had ended (and after the killers committed suicide). This response - or lack of it - caused outrage. Consequently, the rules of engagement were changed, and cops in most states were told, effectively, they had to put themselves between the shooters and the shot-at 'civilians'. And as a result of that, cops were making snap judgements which invariably counted in some of the deep-seated racial biases - even among some black cops facing black assailants - that are part of the US's historical DNA. The result is that trail of tears contained in the Guardian's database. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 Sad indeed. I got a clearer picture from the data and reading through some of the individual cases about how this mass killing works and why it's so ethnically skewed. It's not that individual US police officers are overtly racist, in the sense that they see a black man and feel an urgent need to shoot him. It's rather that their training is all about 'officer safety', and, deep down, they feel more threatened by a black man (and, occasionally, woman) than a white individual. Reading through the 'found innocent' tags, I noticed this innocence was based almost always on the claim of perceived threat. Of course, if you're brought up in a culture where black men are historically viewed, even by 'science' (such as eugenics and IQ testing), as more dangerous and/or more stupid, then it's a response with deep roots in racism but not with an overtly racist motive. This 'officer safety' principle has shifted somewhat in recent years, and in a way that has probably exacerbated the problem. As part of my day job, I did a close study of the minute-by-minute events during the Columbine High School massacre that took place in 1999. When the two shooters started killing school students, there was actually a police officer on the premises, and he returned fire. But he did so from outside the building, while almost all of the shooting was inside. When the city police arrived they also returned fire for a few brief moments, but again from outside building. In fact, all the cops were grouped around windows of the library, where the worst of the massacre happened (the shooters went around executing pupils who had taken refuge under the library desks). All the time this mass execution was happening, the police steadfastly refused to enter the building on the grounds of 'officer safety'. Having been to the school itself, I can tell you that the cops were virtually within whispering distance of the killers as they went about blasting the heads of their schoolmates. But they didn't enter the building - and then only as a SWAT team - until a full hour after the shooting had ended (and after the killers committed suicide). This response - or lack of it - caused outrage. Consequently, the rules of engagement were changed, and cops in most states were told, effectively, they had to put themselves between the shooters and the shot-at 'civilians'. And as a result of that, cops were making snap judgements which invariably counted in some of the deep-seated racial biases - even among some black cops facing black assailants - that are part of the US's historical DNA. The result is that trail of tears contained in the Guardian's database. Thanks, very interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 .... this innocence was based almost always on the claim of "perceived threat". There you are Sarnie, that's how the officers are generally found to be not culpable. Feel free to provide a reasoned response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the colonel Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 MMMMM ........cant you find anything from North America.........small country, small minds USA = big country, big asses and big mouths Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the colonel Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 **** poor effort should have saved your time Just like 99.9% of the dross you have posted on here. And the 0.1% is being generous. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the colonel Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 Sad indeed. I got a clearer picture from the data and reading through some of the individual cases about how this mass killing works and why it's so ethnically skewed. It's not that individual US police officers are overtly racist, in the sense that they see a black man and feel an urgent need to shoot him. It's rather that their training is all about 'officer safety', and, deep down, they feel more threatened by a black man (and, occasionally, woman) than a white individual. Reading through the 'found innocent' tags, I noticed this innocence was based almost always on the claim of perceived threat. Of course, if you're brought up in a culture where black men are historically viewed, even by 'science' (such as eugenics and IQ testing), as more dangerous and/or more stupid, then it's a response with deep roots in racism but not with an overtly racist motive. This 'officer safety' principle has shifted somewhat in recent years, and in a way that has probably exacerbated the problem. As part of my day job, I did a close study of the minute-by-minute events during the Columbine High School massacre that took place in 1999. When the two shooters started killing school students, there was actually a police officer on the premises, and he returned fire. But he did so from outside the building, while almost all of the shooting was inside. When the city police arrived they also returned fire for a few brief moments, but again from outside building. In fact, all the cops were grouped around windows of the library, where the worst of the massacre happened (the shooters went around executing pupils who had taken refuge under the library desks). All the time this mass execution was happening, the police steadfastly refused to enter the building on the grounds of 'officer safety'. Having been to the school itself, I can tell you that the cops were virtually within whispering distance of the killers as they went about blasting the heads of their schoolmates. But they didn't enter the building - and then only as a SWAT team - until a full hour after the shooting had ended (and after the killers committed suicide). This response - or lack of it - caused outrage. Consequently, the rules of engagement were changed, and cops in most states were told, effectively, they had to put themselves between the shooters and the shot-at 'civilians'. And as a result of that, cops were making snap judgements which invariably counted in some of the deep-seated racial biases - even among some black cops facing black assailants - that are part of the US's historical DNA. The result is that trail of tears contained in the Guardian's database. Good post. But will sarni start telling us that USA is the land of the free....now that would be funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 All I want you to do is give an example of the sort of thing that might have happened to make the police feel they were justified in their actions. I'm not asking you to provide concrete proof, or the missing 'before' bit of the video. Surely that's not too difficult given the supposedly superior nature of your 'Canuck' brain ? OK ..........moving your hands to part of your clothing including hats............running when told to stop.............whats so difficult for you to understand ?? unless you just hate cops and North America.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 They're Canada's Royal family as well, you do know that don't you. And I'm a life long republican, so couldn't give a rat's arse that somebody found a video showing Edward VIII, a known nazi sympathiser, playing such games. Oh the irony .........so a vid showing the cow giving a Nazi salute don't count but a smart phone vid of US cops does .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpb Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 unless you just hate cops and North America.... I didn't hate cops and North America but your answers are beginning to make me have second thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 I think he means you like Cheesy Poofs, ( which BTW does NOT infer anything about your sexual orientation ), you insist on trying to bully people with the demand " Respect mah authoritah !", and always end an argument you are losing with the phrase "screw you guys, I'm going home". Probably also that you appear to be 8 years old. MMMM..........have no idea what the hell you are rambling on about............and I am not losing the argument....... here to stay and await your next effort to insult me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 So where is your 'meaningful debate' response to Verbal's post ? Post #2029 and it was to Micky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 Your rational debate stuff is going so well. You were just so right when you told us all that's what you wanted to have. The level of rational-ness in your posting has gone through the roof. Well done. What I like about you now is you've really taken to debating the issues, like a changed man. By no means are you just ham-fistedly typing in whatever infantile drivel enters your head in order to get some reaction and avoid engaging with any discussion point with anyone. Let's see how it's all going. 1. Simple abuse. 2% rational. 2. Have a little pop at the UK, for the 347th time on this forum, using the same "small country" line as several times previously. 3% rational. 3. Basic wasteof typing. 1%: 4. Flailing about gibberish ranting desperate for attention, 0.5%: 5. More flailing about gibberish. 2%. I think it is the LOLing at the end of each post that elevate your arguments to the level of high level rational-ness. Oh dear .............I bow to your self-designated superiority..........got me there..... since you don't like smileys (rolleyes) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 I question the state of your mental health based on evidence of your abnormal behaviour on here - which I see shows no signs of abating. 42 Pages. Abnormal behaviour seems to be anyone that don't agree with you and answers the same way to talk to them.............if you don't like it too bad ...........so either stop the personal insults and engage in a meaningful discussion or just stop adding to the 42 pages.....your choice and the same goes for everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 Fool. The Counted. Read. The officer is 'innocent'? http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/23/cleveland-officer-not-guilty-shot-137-times-police Bye. BYE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 Sad indeed. I got a clearer picture from the data and reading through some of the individual cases about how this mass killing works and why it's so ethnically skewed. It's not that individual US police officers are overtly racist, in the sense that they see a black man and feel an urgent need to shoot him. It's rather that their training is all about 'officer safety', and, deep down, they feel more threatened by a black man (and, occasionally, woman) than a white individual. Reading through the 'found innocent' tags, I noticed this innocence was based almost always on the claim of perceived threat. Of course, if you're brought up in a culture where black men are historically viewed, even by 'science' (such as eugenics and IQ testing), as more dangerous and/or more stupid, then it's a response with deep roots in racism but not with an overtly racist motive. This 'officer safety' principle has shifted somewhat in recent years, and in a way that has probably exacerbated the problem. As part of my day job, I did a close study of the minute-by-minute events during the Columbine High School massacre that took place in 1999. When the two shooters started killing school students, there was actually a police officer on the premises, and he returned fire. But he did so from outside the building, while almost all of the shooting was inside. When the city police arrived they also returned fire for a few brief moments, but again from outside building. In fact, all the cops were grouped around windows of the library, where the worst of the massacre happened (the shooters went around executing pupils who had taken refuge under the library desks). All the time this mass execution was happening, the police steadfastly refused to enter the building on the grounds of 'officer safety'. Having been to the school itself, I can tell you that the cops were virtually within whispering distance of the killers as they went about blasting the heads of their schoolmates. But they didn't enter the building - and then only as a SWAT team - until a full hour after the shooting had ended (and after the killers committed suicide). This response - or lack of it - caused outrage. Consequently, the rules of engagement were changed, and cops in most states were told, effectively, they had to put themselves between the shooters and the shot-at 'civilians'. And as a result of that, cops were making snap judgements which invariably counted in some of the deep-seated racial biases - even among some black cops facing black assailants - that are part of the US's historical DNA. The result is that trail of tears contained in the Guardian's database. So that's your opinion/interpretation ...........I didn't realize that you are qualified to make this analysis............please send to the FBI and the US Justice Department.....you could even meet the Prez when they thank you for your insight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 Thanks, very interesting. See post#2071 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 There you are Sarnie, that's how the officers are generally found to be not culpable. Feel free to provide a reasoned response. See post#2071 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 20 July, 2015 Share Posted 20 July, 2015 USA = big country, big asses and big mouths Just like 99.9% of the dross you have posted on here. And the 0.1% is being generous. lol Good post. But will sarni start telling us that USA is the land of the free....now that would be funny. Don't know why I am replying .........but yes the land of fat asses, big mouths and the free........and don't worship Hereditary Nazis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deano6 Posted 21 July, 2015 Share Posted 21 July, 2015 So that's your opinion/interpretation ...........I didn't realize that you are qualified to make this analysis............please send to the FBI and the US Justice Department.....you could even meet the Prez when they thank you for your insight. You didn't realise he was qualified to make that assessment? Fair play to you for owning up to that! Credit to you where it's due, I didn't think you had it in you to come out and admit you were wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 21 July, 2015 Share Posted 21 July, 2015 You didn't realise he was qualified to make that assessment? Fair play to you for owning up to that! Credit to you where it's due, I didn't think you had it in you to come out and admit you were wrong. Never said I was wrong.......just amazed that he is a qualified criminologist ..........oh wait...........an armchair one!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 21 July, 2015 Share Posted 21 July, 2015 MMMM..........have no idea what the hell you are rambling on about............and I am not losing the argument....... here to stay and await your next effort to insult me That was a short introduction to Eric Cartman, a character in South Park to whom you had been compared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 21 July, 2015 Share Posted 21 July, 2015 OK ..........moving your hands to part of your clothing including hats............running when told to stop.............whats so difficult for you to understand ?? unless you just hate cops and North America.... When did either of those actions warrant being shot dead ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 21 July, 2015 Share Posted 21 July, 2015 Don't know why I am replying .........but yes the land of fat asses, big mouths and the free........and don't worship Hereditary Nazis. No, they just worship the dollar, and try to dominate the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 21 July, 2015 Share Posted 21 July, 2015 Abnormal behaviour seems to be anyone that don't agree with you ... Disagreements on the internet - in life generally - are of course commonplace. Your behaviour on here however is clearly abnormal in so far as you have prolonged this matter now beyond all reason. I have been a member of this forum since back in 2007, and in all that time I cannot recall anyone else (even Pap) taking a argument nearly this far. Any remotely normal person in your situation would have 'dropped' this many months ago - you seem utterly incapable of doing that. I can only conclude that you have developed some deep seated egotistical psychosis that manifests itself in a need to have the 'last word' on this thread, but your pig-headed ''I'm right everyone else is wrong'' attitude has resulted in you irritating so many people that it is virtual certainty now you will never have that 'last word' you so desperately seek. In addition to your apparent mental health issues, you also seem to lack the intellect to comprehend the sheer impossibly of the situation your own folly has placed you in. Perhaps if you were fundamentally correct here and the lack of gun-control and/or police malpractice were not very real problems in the United States then there might be some small justification for the obsessive behaviour you exhibit daily - but clearly the overwhelming consensus is that these are indeed very real issues that need addressing. That has become a consensus because it is perfectly true. What you have built here is a 42 page high monument to your own stupidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 21 July, 2015 Share Posted 21 July, 2015 (edited) Wow, what a change. What progress. Now, he done a "considered" response he have. And jolly proud of what he's done, too. See post#2071 See post#2071 And quite rightly. Well done you. Well done. Brace yourself, here it is: So that's your opinion/interpretation ...........I didn't realize that you are qualified to make this analysis............please send to the FBI and the US Justice Department.....you could even meet the Prez when they thank you for your insight. Hang on everyone, he done a "meaningful" response too.... Post #2029 and it was to Micky In case you missed it. It's pretty meaningful, I've got to say. Nothing to dread.......... 1st response...........most gun deaths are by side arms i.e. revolvers or pistols.........how do you take those out of peoples hands ??? But this is my favourite post. .......and I am not losing the argument....... So sweet, bless him. Edited 21 July, 2015 by CB Fry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 21 July, 2015 Share Posted 21 July, 2015 you have prolonged this matter now beyond all reason. . In addition to those that can't resist responding to his social media 'experiment'. (Its still not quite up to Saint Scooby's vintage 2009 level though.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 21 July, 2015 Share Posted 21 July, 2015 It's their country, their problem. If they see it as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadoldgit Posted 21 July, 2015 Share Posted 21 July, 2015 Disagreements on the internet - in life generally - are of course commonplace. Your behaviour on here however is clearly abnormal in so far as you have prolonged this matter now beyond all reason. I have been a member of this forum since back in 2007, and in all that time I cannot recall anyone else (even Pap) taking a argument nearly this far. Any remotely normal person in your situation would have 'dropped' this many months ago - you seem utterly incapable of doing that. I can only conclude that you have developed some deep seated egotistical psychosis that manifests itself in a need to have the 'last word' on this thread, but your pig-headed ''I'm right everyone else is wrong'' attitude has resulted in you irritating so many people that it is virtual certainty now you will never have that 'last word' you so desperately seek. In addition to your apparent mental health issues, you also seem to lack the intellect to comprehend the sheer impossibly of the situation your own folly has placed you in. Perhaps if you were fundamentally correct here and the lack of gun-control and/or police malpractice were not very real problems in the United States then there might be some small justification for the obsessive behaviour you exhibit daily - but clearly the overwhelming consensus is that these are indeed very real issues that need addressing. That has become a consensus because it is perfectly true. What you have built here is a 42 page high monument to your own stupidity. He does have a point here Sarnia. Perhaps it is time to let go? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deano6 Posted 21 July, 2015 Share Posted 21 July, 2015 Never said I was wrong.......just amazed that he is a qualified criminologist ..........oh wait...........an armchair one!!! Don't backtrack now, you'll ruin your carefully built reputation. Never back down, Sarnia. Just have confidence and be true to yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manuel Posted 21 July, 2015 Share Posted 21 July, 2015 List of countries by intentional homicide. Interesting to see where the USA lies amongst others, despite the gun culture. I guess there would be many other deaths at the hands of guns which wouldn't be listed here though, eg claims of self defense, police shootings, accidental shootings. Still, a stat's a stat. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 21 July, 2015 Share Posted 21 July, 2015 List of countries by intentional homicide. Interesting to see where the USA lies amongst others, despite the gun culture. I guess there would be many other deaths at the hands of guns which wouldn't be listed here though, eg claims of self defense, police shootings, accidental shootings. Still, a stat's a stat. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate Greenland looks dodgy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the colonel Posted 21 July, 2015 Share Posted 21 July, 2015 Don't know why I am replying .........but yes the land of fat asses, big mouths and the free........and don't worship Hereditary Nazis. Oh no I don't why I'm replying also...nah nah nah. Your last comment just goes to show what someone send earlier, that you should question your own sanity. Ah that would show perhaps you had some.......perhaps you should take their advice and find help. And as for you lot being 'free' as I said that is the biggest joke. Have you ever been to Texas!! Anyhow how would most of you know what it is like to be free the vast majority have never been out of the country to experience other cultures and to see what real freedom is like. So I do excuse you for needing mental help as you have been brainwashed from birth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the colonel Posted 21 July, 2015 Share Posted 21 July, 2015 BYE[/quote Strange that it was unarmed two black guys shot by a white officer 49, just in case he missed. And then found not guilt because it wasn't proven it was one of his bullets or one of the other 12 police that also fired another 88 times just in case one of them missed! So why weren't they all in court. Only in America land of the free as long as you are not black or any other colour that doesn't fit. Land of the free.yeah right this case wasn't even in the south were it happened. How is your application for membership to the KKK coming on? I'm sure it must be hereditary so you will have no problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 21 July, 2015 Share Posted 21 July, 2015 That was a short introduction to Eric Cartman, a character in South Park to whom you had been compared. Well since I have never seen the TV show .................how the f*ck can I reply to an insult ...............guess if you guys watch it and it is a US show......mmmmmmmmmmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 22 July, 2015 Share Posted 22 July, 2015 When did either of those actions warrant being shot dead ? Hey we are getting back to the heart of the debate ..........which seem to revolve around 2 issues. #1 your(plural) belief that the cops should be un-armed or take their chances and not get killed making an arrest or just let anything go ..... #2 none of you have ever stated how you think that you can reduce gun crime in the US......just go on and on saying how bad to your minds it is. When 1 of you can answer #2 then we can have a debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 22 July, 2015 Share Posted 22 July, 2015 No, they just worship the dollar, and try to dominate the world. .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 22 July, 2015 Share Posted 22 July, 2015 Disagreements on the internet - in life generally - are of course commonplace. Your behaviour on here however is clearly abnormal in so far as you have prolonged this matter now beyond all reason. I have been a member of this forum since back in 2007, and in all that time I cannot recall anyone else (even Pap) taking a argument nearly this far. Any remotely normal person in your situation would have 'dropped' this many months ago - you seem utterly incapable of doing that. I can only conclude that you have developed some deep seated egotistical psychosis that manifests itself in a need to have the 'last word' on this thread, but your pig-headed ''I'm right everyone else is wrong'' attitude has resulted in you irritating so many people that it is virtual certainty now you will never have that 'last word' you so desperately seek. In addition to your apparent mental health issues, you also seem to lack the intellect to comprehend the sheer impossibly of the situation your own folly has placed you in. Perhaps if you were fundamentally correct here and the lack of gun-control and/or police malpractice were not very real problems in the United States then there might be some small justification for the obsessive behaviour you exhibit daily - but clearly the overwhelming consensus is that these are indeed very real issues that need addressing. That has become a consensus because it is perfectly true. What you have built here is a 42 page high monument to your own stupidity. OK just so you know I have been a member since the TOSSA days So just say after all your hand wringing what your solution is ??? and believe me I will have the last word........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 22 July, 2015 Share Posted 22 July, 2015 Wow, what a change. What progress. Now, he done a "considered" response he have. And jolly proud of what he's done, too. And quite rightly. Well done you. Well done. Brace yourself, here it is: Hang on everyone, he done a "meaningful" response too.... In case you missed it. It's pretty meaningful, I've got to say. But this is my favourite post. So sweet, bless him. Cant stay away can you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 22 July, 2015 Share Posted 22 July, 2015 In addition to those that can't resist responding to his social media 'experiment'. (Its still not quite up to Saint Scooby's vintage 2009 level though.) ................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 22 July, 2015 Share Posted 22 July, 2015 He does have a point here Sarnia. Perhaps it is time to let go? No Way Jose ..........if anyone thinks they can insult me can keep this going forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 22 July, 2015 Share Posted 22 July, 2015 Don't backtrack now, you'll ruin your carefully built reputation. Never back down, Sarnia. Just have confidence and be true to yourself. LOL when did I back down???....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarniaSaint Posted 22 July, 2015 Share Posted 22 July, 2015 Oh no I don't why I'm replying also...nah nah nah. Your last comment just goes to show what someone send earlier, that you should question your own sanity. Ah that would show perhaps you had some.......perhaps you should take their advice and find help. And as for you lot being 'free' as I said that is the biggest joke. Have you ever been to Texas!! Anyhow how would most of you know what it is like to be free the vast majority have never been out of the country to experience other cultures and to see what real freedom is like. So I do excuse you for needing mental help as you have been brainwashed from birth. BYE[/quote Strange that it was unarmed two black guys shot by a white officer 49, just in case he missed. And then found not guilt because it wasn't proven it was one of his bullets or one of the other 12 police that also fired another 88 times just in case one of them missed! So why weren't they all in court. Only in America land of the free as long as you are not black or any other colour that doesn't fit. Land of the free.yeah right this case wasn't even in the south were it happened. How is your application for membership to the KKK coming on? I'm sure it must be hereditary so you will have no problems. you're a bit out of your depth here .......so a word of advise............stay away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 22 July, 2015 Share Posted 22 July, 2015 (edited) Cant stay away can you [emoji38] Would you mind highlighting which of the last batch of replies need to be filed in the "reasoned/rational debate" pile. It's so difficult to tell them apart from the ham fisted troll drivel. I like to be able to drink in the posts when you're really trying and your little brain is composing a "reasoned" or "rational" response. I like the idea of you leaning back in your chair and congratulating yourself on how rational you're being. Anyway, a list of post numbers of your rational debate replies each night would be a jolly handy ready reckoner for us. Saves trawling through the reactionary, LOL-strewn barely literate garbage you also post. Because you are desperate to have a reasoned debate here aren't you, yes? Aren't you? So, post numbers please. Edited 22 July, 2015 by CB Fry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 22 July, 2015 Share Posted 22 July, 2015 #2 none of you have ever stated how you think that you can reduce gun crime in the US......just go on and on saying how bad to your minds it is. When 1 of you can answer #2 then we can have a debate. Reduce the number of guns in private ownership, and make it much harder to acquire them in the first place. As Aleksander Orlov would put it, "simples". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now