I'm shook? I have not abandoned my prior position, but I can't help if you didn't understand my prior position and now think I've abandoned it.

But hey, let's hear about how you're going to have enough cops hiding in an all glass store to arrest 80 kids without being seen and without anyone getting shot. How about SWAT units hidden inside 20 UPS trucks lined down the street? That's pretty inconspicuous.

Ya you just continue the lies now and anyone can see that.

You have now switched to a new strawman you will soon deny you were stuffing as you pretend the cops even with foreknowledge that `~80 people are showing up to rob a Nordstrom's or other such store are incapable of doing anything to either arrest or deter it.

You are asserting as if laughable they cold hide or arrest, you then stuff the strawman even further with SWAT.

Your entire position in this thread has relied upon one false and ridiculous assertion after another that you make and cling to and later deny.

There is a lot the police could do, for instance if they saw in a chat thread that a Nordstrom was going to be hit on a certain day and certain time. That you need to dream up and give yourself fantastical situations to pretend they are powerless is on you.

I shouldn't have to spell it out for you but I suspect, due to you being so dumb, I just might have to.

this was a really good thread at one point, had a lot of good discussion and i actually came in here with my mind firmly in one position and ultimately fell on the opposite - which is peak good thread territory

but alas once the issue is over with this is what happens, over and out, have fun just copy pasting the same argument using slightly different words each time throughout eternity

Lol that saying SWAT, an actual tactical force that would be the most applicable here, is creating a strawman.

Okay. Instead of saying vague things like the police will be waiting to pounce, be more detailed.

Pretend this is the store:



Let's hear the tactical setup. Be as detailed as possible.

The internet is an imperfect place. Sorry to disappoint you.

well you convinced me. life imprisonment for stealing. proly a mistake not to just burn em at the stake but Im a softie.

Yeah, it's either no jail, or life in prison/burning at the stake. Nothing in between.

Do tell: The clown that walked into the US Capitol Building and stole Pelosi's lectern. What should his punishment be?

Just because you sit here like a mule and say you're not a right winger doesn't mean you don't think exactly like one.
That's not on me. I'm just reading what you write and responding to it.

The question is, what does a convicted felon with no time served mean to you ?
It's not at all a new concept. It happens all the time. Eventually of course you do time but not always the first or second time you're convicted.
So maybe your overreaction to humans behaving badly is just an extension of your own ignorance and naivety ?


I agree that there is no way I can convey any reasonable idea to a person like you.

bruh, you are asking the wrong guy. the liberals on this forum (shout out to PaulD) have called me a Nazi bc ofc I dont think any of them should have gotten harsh punishment (now, the politicians and propagandist its a different story) nor do I think they should have shot that girl. bc ya know, I can hold consistent viewpoints.

It's on you because you hear one thing you don't like, gun owner, for example, and then you label that person a right-winger and then anything they say you speculate on what their thoughts are under the assumption that they're a MAGAtard. Some of us are actually nonpartisan.

Lol at convicted felons who don't serve time happens a lot, so therefore it's okay.

Lol at wanting people to be punished for their crimes = an overreaction.

And lol at calling smash and grabs "behaving badly" like as if they're throwing a tantrum for being asked to do their schoolwork.

As long as you're consistent. I'm consistent, too.

The strawman was you pretending that SWAT was involved in my scenarios when I said or suggested no such thing.


And again this entire line you are taking is wrong.

If the police absolutely have data that 80 people are showing up to rob that store at 6pm then all they have to do is park a few police cars out front and the people will show up and leave. The store will be happy.

Again your strawman aside I am not pretending there is one solution and that is 'arrest all 80 at once'. What I am SAYING is that if the police are monitoring the communications and they KNOW in ADVANCE which stores they are going to hit and when they will then have tools to deal with it. That might be setting up for arrest. It might be setting up for deterrence.

Your entire position was that somehow the communications channel could never be cracked and the perps would go to their death to protect it (you have now back peddled on that), and are now switching to a strawman as if 'arrest them all' is what I am saying is the only answer here.

Do you not think that store would be thrilled to be told in ADVANCE that they were targeted to be robbed on X Day and X time and that the police will have X police cars out front to deter it?

OH the irony as the guy who argues each and every extreme with me as he stuffs strawman, complains about same.

Here is my controversial view you keep acting as if there is nothing reasonable between your extremes:

- police can and should focus on finding out what mass communication methods are being used to let 80-500+ know where and when a store has been picked and on what day and time
- police once they infiltrate that communication can use many tools or tactics to either arrest or deter the offenders if they show up


YOU: ZOMG tell me how SWAT teams you are going to stuff into how many UPS vans?? What you say above is impossible!!!

I have no problem with gun owners.
My problem wrt this discussion has been with vigilantes.

And you are free to label yourself anyway you like but I'm going to form an opinion on what you say and my opinion will, unfortunately for you, be a fairly accurate one based on the evidence you present. I get that you can be pretending to be a right wing racist but this is only an internet forum. So I'm going by what you give me.

Also, I've never met a MAGAtard yet who didn't tell me he was nonpartisan. So ...there you go again.




Again, this has been our criminal justice system for many decades.
Being arrested, charged and pleading out is the most common way felons are 'punished'.

I'm sorry you want more personal satisfaction from the process. Again, I recommend an Islamic Republic to you. You'd probably like it much more as you have more in common with the people there. This is a Western democracy and we do things differently. It's a bit more sloppy at times but we Americans like it that way.

Yes, committing felonies is behaving badly. That's why they're facing pretty serious charges.


[/QUOTE]

Lol, I never said they'd go to their death to protect anyone or anything. That was something you projected onto me and clinged tightly to. If you doubt this, go quote the post where I said that.

Okay, so now you're changing it from cops ambushing 80 people to just having a few cars out in front so the robbers will drive to another store? Okay.

Cute. What have I said that leads you to believe I'm racist? I literally mentioned nothing about race. Kooksville here.





Now from racism to Islamic stuff. Hitting all the kook stuff in one post.

Dude. You literally said they can plan ahead and have cops in the store for a gotcha. Now you've rescinded and are going with police car presence.

This!!!

Erm, I am going to get rotten eggs thrown at me, but I kinda think Land O' Lakes is being eminently reasonable here, even if he does happen to be an ammosexual.

Dude has a point, and he is not an extremist. Prob not even a right winger. If you guys (Rflush, Cuepee) listen to him, it would make for much better discourse. /2c

He should be locked up for contributing to Global Warming (oops, I mean Climate Change)

Standard tactics by many posters in this forum. Brand anyone they disagree with as a racist/extreme right winger. Sleazy bad faith debating tactics.

Pretty much every internet politics "discussion" devolves into name-calling at some point:

"Racist"
"Sexist"
"Homophobic"
"Xenophobic"
"Liar"
"Gaslighter"
"Transphobic"
"Libt*rd"
etc., etc...

In the soon-to-be defunct RGT Forum, a favorite is Psychological Reductionism.

Full disclosure: I've done more than my share of name-calling as well, so this is not a "Stowing thrones in grass houses" situation.

**** him.

If he wants to make a point he should just make it.

He's trying to be clever and show us the error of our ways and that makes for terrible discourse.
Especially when all we're doing it responding to things he's actually saying. He just pivots and takes a contrary position and then plays the "you're not smart because you jumped to the obvious conclusion that I represented" shtick.

Sklansky he is not. (Maybe his love child from a special needs romp but that's about it).

BTW, you understand as well as anyone the implications of being a convicted felon.

Pretending that criminals aren't punished is a bad faith argument.

His point is that individuals who are presumed innocent should be punished by law enforcement directly or at least that the presumption should be overlooked in cases that he deems such action fair. That's not the way things have ever been done in the US (with the exception of poor immigrants and blacks where the laws were overlooked, just like the 'all men were created equal' was overlooked).

He knows this. And he knows it will make him look like a racist to say what he says.

The little Irish boy may actually not understand how racist he comes off as he comes from an entirely different culture.
But LOL is trolling.

The threshold for misdemeanor theft was raised to $950. That is fact, and I'm afforded the right to disagree with that. California continues to pass laws favorable for criminals due to name your excuse.


Bullshit. I never said any such thing.

Of the 14 people arrested in 2 weeks of smash and grabs, 11 were released on zero bail, 1 was released due to being underage, and 2 were released on bail. They'll be hitting a few more smash and grabs before their first court date that they will likely ignore. 8th Amendment states no excessive bail. Well, fvcking zero bail is sure as shiit not what they had in mind.

Again with labeling people racist who have never said anything about race. How is speaking against crime being racist? Put up or stfu troll.

Lol I see that rape apologist is still obsessed with me and my nationality while lacking the self awareness to understand how bigoted this makes him comes off as.