Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

That makes me sick. The police force looks like it's practically out of control, thanks to these tazer-happy nutcases.

This is really a problem almost in all the countries of the world. The governments has given more powers to police to establish the rit of the government.That is why we see such incidents that show the police is out of control.

thats the idea. to get you use to the future police state

Originally posted by KingTech
This is really a problem almost in all the countries of the world. The governments has given more powers to police to establish the rit of the government.That is why we see such incidents that show the police is out of control.

The police force in the united states posseses ONLY the power to enforce the law. They have no dirty harry rights. If that video is real. That officer will be banished from the police force, fined and sued. The only two titles which have more power than the constitution in this country are corrupt politicians and lobbyists. With enough evidence though, no one safe from the justice system, not even the innocent. The only shadow government is the proceedings which happen behind closed doors. The justice system has many chinks but its not because the boogeyman wants to enslave us in a police state.

Oh yeah, they like to threaten everyone with tazers. Me included. I'd sue them if they would have!

Good Lord, that RINF website is retarded.

I like this video better.

JwIGMKfmLFE

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Good Lord, that RINF website is retarded.

I like this video better.

JwIGMKfmLFE

Even though the officer used extreme force. The lady could have avoided all of the by simply cooperating. By not cooperating her appeals most likely will not be heard in court. To bad some people are dumbasses

Though I didn't watch the video, excessive and abusive force causing emotional damage is a warranted remedy to get off in court. Usually if one is already in cuffs or subdued or is in the arms of larger police officer(s), does it need not to be used.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Good Lord, that RINF website is retarded.

I like this video better.

JwIGMKfmLFE

haermm

That was highly entertaining.

why bother commenting then?

Originally posted by Secretus
haermm

That was highly entertaining.

Like a snuff film?

that lady was putting on a show for the camera's

Grrrl, I on the PHONE. Whatchoo think you doin' tryin' to get me to get out?

OH NO YOU DI'IN'T JUST USE DAT TASER

"Dont taze me bro"

Wow, assuming that's legit, that's by far the worst one yet. Cop totally lied to that other cop, too. Didn't even give a warning, like he said, and said the guy was 'hopping around', which apparantly means standing there not doing much of anything. Sounds like the (former) cop tasered him for wanting to 'be in charge' (ask questions in a fair manner). If it's real, that cop is gone, big time.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
American cops flexing their muscles by doing shit like that is nothing new. I've never been tazed, but I've been maced, and I can tell you that most cops have a "Because I can" attitude about doing those things. Most cops. sure. One bad apple spoils it for all, I see.

So most baseball players, thanks to Barry Bonds, are steroid junkies.

Most Baseball players, thanks to Pete Rose, gamble on their baseball games.

Most NFL WR's, thanx to Rae Carruth, do drive by shootings on their pregnant girlfriends....shall I continue? get the point?

Maybe if you weren't going 175 MPH down the freeway, the cops wouldn't give you such a hard time.

FYI: This is the type of shit cops deal with on a daily basis. The worst of society.


PtfEMhYrMoo

Yeah, THIS cop was WAY outta line....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yz5--_qI_hU&feature=related

It seems to me they are letting the general public know who is in charge, preparation for the police state. This is funny, brave bloke got up again and again

gE_7NTBfwHE

Originally posted by Bicnarok
It seems to me they are letting the general public know who is in charge, preparation for the police state. This is funny, brave bloke got up again and again

gE_7NTBfwHE BULLSHIT. See my two previous posts.

lol

right, because there is nothing that a civilian can do to warrant being tazed...

actually, that video that RJ posted is somewhat terrifying. I don't envy cops at all.

No matter what they deal with a daily basis, it does not give them the right to treat me like shit "just because."

I understand what you mean but one woman being a **** doesn't make all women sluts. Same applies here

but you must admit, there are times when it is appropriate to use a tazer.

Like, when said individual above had finished fighting the cop and was trying to get back into his car to drive away, clearly intoxicated.

It is really easy to look at a situation and see the uniformed and armed individual as acting needlessly tough, but what other option would you suggest? The cop beat the man into submission or shock him into submission? Talking had already failed, as had forceful restraint.

I'm not saying either extreme is correct because neither can go for EVERY SINGLE SITUATION.

With that being said, force should not be the first option. I'm not saying every cop does this, and certainly no one will YouTube a cop being more calm and assisting people and the such. They will only recieve bad publicity and I do hate that.

Originally posted by KingTech
This is really a problem almost in all the countries of the world. The governments has given more powers to police to establish the rit of the government.That is why we see such incidents that show the police is out of control. Don't see things like this happen in Holland, Germany or the UK...well, not as often.

I'm not willing to say that only because America is full of asses who love to give negative press to any and all parts of the government. Not every cop is like that.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
YES, the cop overreacted, but this could have all been avoided if he had just FOLLOWED THE OFFICERS INSTRUCTIONS. when the cop drew the taser, the guy turns and started walking away. at this point, it is safe to say that the officer might have assumed he was gonna run.

I thought it was procedure to tell the driver what speed he was going and why he was getting the ticket. I've been pulled over once for speeding, just got a warning. But the officer told me my exact speed and why I was getting the warning. He just didn't say "Oh, you were going a little fast back there."

The guy was stupid to turn his back and start walking back to his car but the cop just tasers him with no warning. Shouldn't be allowed to happen. Then when the other officer arrives he lies about it, if the cop didn't think he was in the wrong, why lie about the whole situation? The driver wasn't "hopping around" he was asking questions, that should have been answered, then gets tasered for it.

Then the guy asks him to read him his rights and the cop refuses to do it.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
yes, the cop didnt follow procedure, but the driver only made it worse by trying to assume leadership with the cop. sign the ticket, fight it in traffic court. how hard is that?

All the guy wanted to know was the exact speed the cop clocked him at. How hard is it to tell him that?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
dude, i just acknowledged the cop was out of line and not following procedure. the driver chose to challenge the cop and made things worse.


clear?

Yeah.

No need to get an attitude.

I think people are under some kind of "perfect world" misconception.

The job of a police officer is to ALWAYS BE IN CONTROL.

So, if a cop pulls you over, their job is to BE IN CONTROL.

It does not matter if they are right or wrong, but if you try to assert control over the situation, they will escalate it.

There are ways to argue and plead your case to the police. For instance, give him your license and registration, cooperate, then ask. Like RJ said, if they are mistaken, then you have legal recourse in a court of law.

Most of these tazer situations seem, imho, to stem from some idea these people have, that they, for some strange reason, deserve to have the authority over the police man.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
no attitude, I just wanted to be sure you got my point.

My bad.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Yeah, THIS cop was WAY outta line....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yz5--_qI_hU&feature=related

HOLY SHIT! Ex Marine laid down some village justice. That is AWESOME. You only hear bout that shit movie's.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
It seems to me they are letting the general public know who is in charge, preparation for the police state. This is funny, brave bloke got up again and again

gE_7NTBfwHE

Yeah, not sure how he is brave. Thats one dumbshit that deserved to get tasered and maced

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
yes, thats why we have traffic court. All the idiot had to do was accept the ticket and fight it. but NO. He had to act like a know it all. The cop has a RADAR, and the driver was just GUESSING.

YES, the cop overreacted, but this could have all been avoided if he had just FOLLOWED THE OFFICERS INSTRUCTIONS. when the cop drew the taser, the guy turns and started walking away. at this point, it is safe to say that the officer might have assumed he was gonna run.

Me, personally, I'd have tried to be more clear that if he didnt cooperate that I was gonna ***** slap him.

More importantly, it could have been avoided had the cop does his job properly, and told the man how fast he was going, and more importantly, warned the man that he was going to use a taser, as is common procedure. The guy was just standing there trying to talk to the cop and understand what was going on. That's not against the law.

The guy wasn't trying to assert control, he was asking completely fair questions. Yes, he began stepping back a bit when the cop pulled the taser because it's freaking human reaction to recoil when there's something that can cause pain pointed at you, especially if it's without warning, like this one was.

Is this going to be another thread where RJ throws out common sense and defends the police regardless of how wrong they are in a given situation?

Originally posted by BackFire
freaking human reaction to recoil when there's something that can cause pain pointed at you, especially if it's without warning

Yeah, i get that reaction from the ladies in the bedroom ALL the time.

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
Yeah, i get that reaction from the ladies in the bedroom ALL the time.

Can you blame them? Most people recoil at the sight of genitalia covered with oozing warts.

Originally posted by Robtard
Can you blame them? Most people recoil at the sight of genitalia covered with oozing warts.


hmmm...,maybe. I thought they would appreciate the flavor that pussing warts have to offer though.

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
hmmm...,maybe. I thought they would appreciate the flavor that pussing warts have to offer though.

Originally posted by BackFire
More importantly, it could have been avoided had the cop does his job properly, and told the man how fast he was going, and more importantly, warned the man that he was going to use a taser, as is common procedure. The guy was just standing there trying to talk to the cop and understand what was going on. That's not against the law.

The guy wasn't trying to assert control, he was asking completely fair questions. Yes, he began stepping back a bit when the cop pulled the taser because it's freaking human reaction to recoil when there's something that can cause pain pointed at you, especially if it's without warning, like this one was.

I don't think anyone is saying that the cop acted according to how we, in a perfect world, would want him to.

Yet, I would contend that deliberately disobeying a police officer, whether they are in the right or wrong, should count as "trying to assert control".

I would like to know where you guys are from, because it seems there that a cop yelling "Get on the ground and put your hands behind your back" where you're from is more of a "please and thank you" thing...

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Most cops. sure. One bad apple spoils it for all, I see.

So most baseball players, thanks to Barry Bonds, are steroid junkies.

Most Baseball players, thanks to Pete Rose, gamble on their baseball games.

Most NFL WR's, thanx to Rae Carruth, do drive by shootings on their pregnant girlfriends....shall I continue? get the point?

Maybe if you weren't going 175 MPH down the freeway, the cops wouldn't give you such a hard time.

It's not just one bad apple, with cops though. With them, damn-near half the barrel is spoiled.

"It's not that we put bad apples in a good barrel. We put good apples in a bad barrel. The barrel corrupts anything that it touches."

-Phil Zimbardo, psychologist responsible for the "Stanford Prison Experiment"

Though I can't claim it as fact, I have seen it and have been told very similar stories to attest that the Law Enforcement field attracts people who are control freaks.

I once had a cop unholster his gun and yell at me to put my hands up, because I got out of my car and said "excuse me, officer" while he was talking to another cop in a squad car in a parking lot. Control Freaks.

Originally posted by inimalist
"Stanford Prison Experiment"

Which was one of the biggest disasters in social research history.

Originally posted by Robtard
Though I can't claim it as fact, I have seen it and have been told very similar stories to attest that the Law Enforcement field attracts people who are control freaks.


Well of course, it allows them to act out their personality.

Originally posted by inimalist
"It's not that we put bad apples in a good barrel. We put good apples in a bad barrel. The barrel corrupts anything that it touches."

-Phil Zimbardo, psychologist responsible for the "Stanford Prison Experiment"

Even though it's German, 'Das Experiment' is a decent (fiction)movie which is loosely based on the Stanfard experiment.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Which was one of the biggest disasters in social research history.


yes, for, imho, the exact same reasons that cops are control freaks

Zimbardo will talk about how his position of authority manipulated even how he perceived the experiment.

Giving people authority over another, especially with uniforms and weapons, is a VERY intoxicating experience. Within days, individuals, who had been screened prior to the experiment for aggression and those types of things, became sociopaths.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water sir.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Well of course, it allows them to act out their personality.

Does the control freak become the cop or the cop the control freak?

Originally posted by Robtard
Even though it's German, 'Das Experiment' is a decent (fiction)movie which is loosely based on the Stanfard experiment.

I loved that movie

Originally posted by inimalist
Does the control freak become the cop or the cop the control freak?


Typically the former. Like I said, having the authority to arrest is an excuse to act out their personality.

Originally posted by inimalist
yes, for, imho, the exact same reasons that cops are control freaks

Zimbardo will talk about how his position of authority manipulated even how he perceived the experiment.

Giving people authority over another, especially with uniforms and weapons, is a VERY intoxicating experience. Within days, individuals, who had been screened prior to the experiment for aggression and those types of things, became sociopaths.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water sir.

Does the control freak become the cop or the cop the control freak?

I loved that movie

I could be wrong, but I recall reading how the 'type A' personalities were given the roll of guards, while the type B people where to play the roll of prisoner. Seems like the experiment was manipulated to make a biased conclusion.

Logically, the control freak actively seeks the roll/profession of cop. I find the "devil made me do it" excuse to be absurb in most situations.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Typically the former. Like I said, having the authority to arrest is an excuse to act out their personality.

I wont disagree with you, but I would say that the situation in many of these cases plays more of a role than the personality.

Originally posted by Robtard
I could be wrong, but I recall reading how the 'type A' personalities were given the roll of guards, while the type B people where to play the roll of prisoner. Seems like the experiment was manipulated to make a biased conclusion.

Logically, the control freak actively seeks the roll/profession of cop. I find the "devil made me do it" excuse to be absurb in most situations.

That may have been true, I'd have to look it up. I'm certainly not citing the experiment here, more the recent Zimbardo work (he just wrote a book). To the best of my knowledge "Type A" personality doesn't mean more sociopathic, but I could be totally wrong.

I would love to see personality scores for individuals before they start their police education, after education, and then later on in their career. I don't disagree that people who want to control things would become police. I guess all I am saying is: Don't count out the situational factors. I don't think anyone is saying that if the man in the car hadn't questioned the officer he would have still been tazed.

Originally posted by inimalist

That may have been true, I'd have to look it up. I'm certainly not citing the experiment here, more the recent Zimbardo work (he just wrote a book). To the best of my knowledge "Type A" personality doesn't mean more sociopathic, but I could be totally wrong.

I would love to see personality scores for individuals before they start their police education, after education, and then later on in their career. I don't disagree that people who want to control things would become police. I guess all I am saying is: Don't count out the situational factors. I don't think anyone is saying that if the man in the car hadn't questioned the officer he would have still been tazed.

I meant more of the classical sense of aggressive and docile personality traits.

Of course situational experiences have an affect and are a factor. After all, every soldier who has killed during wartime certainly wasn't born a natural killer.

its really simple. the cop broke the law by arresting the man with no cause (you know "you're under arrest for ________. you have the right to remain silent, etc...".

so, given that the man was not legally placed under arrest, that was simply an assault. doesnt matter if the guy was an idiot for walking away. doesnt matter that other cops can and have used their taser with just cause and in accordance with the law. all circumstantial parrotous nonesense (which we will likely see spammed over the next 30 or so pages)

Originally posted by inimalist
I don't think anyone is saying that the cop acted according to how we, in a perfect world, would want him to.

Yet, I would contend that deliberately disobeying a police officer, whether they are in the right or wrong, should count as "trying to assert control".

I would like to know where you guys are from, because it seems there that a cop yelling "Get on the ground and put your hands behind your back" where you're from is more of a "please and thank you" thing...

I'm from California.

And it has nothing to do with a perfect world. It has to do with was there good reason for this guy to be tasered -- As in, is asking "Why was I pulled over" and "How fast was I going" and trying to prove that there was no sign, and recoiling when someone seemingly randomly and without warning pulls a harmful device on you, is valid means to tase someone according to normal police protocol.

It's nothing to do with a please and thank you thing. The guy wanted to know exactly what he did wrong before being arrested, it is the officers DUTY to inform him. It's also his duty to give warning before using a taser, and also his duty not to lie to another officer when speaking of what happened.

You said "duty" (doody) 3 times in that post. Fecal freak!

I'm horny.

Originally posted by BackFire
More importantly, it could have been avoided had the cop does his job properly, and told the man how fast he was going, and more importantly, warned the man that he was going to use a taser, as is common procedure. The guy was just standing there trying to talk to the cop and understand what was going on. That's not against the law.

The guy wasn't trying to assert control, he was asking completely fair questions. Yes, he began stepping back a bit when the cop pulled the taser because it's freaking human reaction to recoil when there's something that can cause pain pointed at you, especially if it's without warning, like this one was. he was defying the cop at every turn, challenging him. he is an ******* and I have no pity for him.

as said earlier, a cops job is to stay in control. once dude tried to supercedes the cops authority, HE made the situation worse.

I'll say again that the cop was wrong, and I'll also say again that the incident was brought about because of the drivers insistence at being an *******.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
It's not just one bad apple, with cops though. With them, damn-near half the barrel is spoiled. over exaggarate much?

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand everyone ignores the vids I posted of cops being killed in the line of duty. talk about tunnel vision.

Because they don't have anything to do with the thread.

And he didn't try to do anything except explain himself, and try and understand why the cop was giving him a ticket.

Originally posted by BackFire
Because they don't have anything to do with the thread.

And he didn't try to do anything except explain himself, and try and understand why the cop was giving him a ticket. when people start bashing all cops because of the actions of a few, the vids are entirely relevant, it shows what cops have to put upmwith and why they are on razors edge every second of their work day.

to not acknowledge them as relevant is to rule out all possibilities.

They're not relevant because that's no excuse to abuse their powers.

Just because there's a lot of assholes out there doesn't mean that cops have the right to treat GOOD people like assholes or criminals.

To not acknowledge them as relevant is perfectly logical, since they don't actually have anything to do with the case being discusses in this thread.

Originally posted by BackFire
They're not relevant because that's no excuse to abuse their powers.

Just because there's a lot of assholes out there doesn't mean that cops have the right to treat GOOD people like assholes or criminals.

To not acknowledge them as relevant is perfectly logical, since they don't actually have anything to do with the case being discusses in this thread. answer me this. If the idiot driver had just accepted the ticket and not tried to assert control, then decided to fight it in traffic court, what would probably have happened?

Nothing.

It's completely within his right to challenge the ticket and refuse to sign for it if he doesn't agree with it. It's NOT within the cops right to taser a guy without warning for trying to explain himself.

Not saying the guy handled it in the best possible way, just that there was no reasonable grounds to taser him.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
when people start bashing all cops because of the actions of a few, the vids are entirely relevant, it shows what cops have to put upmwith and why they are on razors edge every second of their work day.

to not acknowledge them as relevant is to rule out all possibilities.

It's no different than waiters who come home, pissed off and say "Get your own food, then.", on their blogs.

Granted, no excuse for bad manners, but their job is to serve, and they knew that going in. They also knew that people would inevitably make it hard at some point, or they are naive.

Do not defend cops as if they are being hard done by. It's their job, to stop hostility, unless you believe every criminal is gonna go quietly.

Cops do not have the right to abuse their power. If you get into a fight and say "He provoked me.", they are not at liberty to REALLY cut you any slack for excessive forceful retaliation, they are not entitled to do the same.

You seem to have a soft spot for anyone who does any job that means they might get harmed, then used the defense of "They chose to do this, respect them.", no. They chose to do it, that's precisely why I do not feel sorry for them.

Maybe someone should post vids of people joining the police force and being briefed on what it requires, what could happen etc, seeing as you are posting vids of them dying. They didn't sign up to die, sure, but they signed up to unquestionably be in dangerous circumstances where death may occur.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's no different than waiters who come home, pissed off and say "Get your own food, then.", on their blogs.

Granted, no excuse for bad manners, but their job is to serve, and they knew that going in. They also knew that people would inevitably make it hard at some point, or they are naive.

Do not defend cops as if they are being hard done by. It's their job, to stop hostility, unless you believe every criminal is gonna go quietly.

Cops do not have the right to abuse their power. If you get into a fight and say "He provoked me.", they are not at liberty to REALLY cut you any slack for excessive forceful retaliation, they are not entitled to do the same.

You seem to have a soft spot for anyone who does any job that means they might get harmed, then used the defense of "They chose to do this, respect them.", no. They chose to do it, that's precisely why I do not feel sorry for them.

Maybe someone should post vids of people joining the police force and being briefed on what it requires, what could happen etc, seeing as you are posting vids of them dying. They didn't sign up to die, sure, but they signed up to unquestionably be in dangerous circumstances where death may occur.

-AC

Abso-bloody-exactly.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's no different than waiters who come home, pissed off and say "Get your own food, then.", on their blogs.

Granted, no excuse for bad manners, but their job is to serve, and they knew that going in. They also knew that people would inevitably make it hard at some point, or they are naive.

Do not defend cops as if they are being hard done by. It's their job, to stop hostility, unless you believe every criminal is gonna go quietly.

Cops do not have the right to abuse their power. If you get into a fight and say "He provoked me.", they are not at liberty to REALLY cut you any slack for excessive forceful retaliation, they are not entitled to do the same.

You seem to have a soft spot for anyone who does any job that means they might get harmed, then used the defense of "They chose to do this, respect them.", no. They chose to do it, that's precisely why I do not feel sorry for them.

Maybe someone should post vids of people joining the police force and being briefed on what it requires, what could happen etc, seeing as you are posting vids of them dying. They didn't sign up to die, sure, but they signed up to unquestionably be in dangerous circumstances where death may occur.

-AC so by signing up for the situations you stated, in which they MAY be killed in the line of duty, wouldn't you say that they are more likely to fly off the handle far easier than say, a convenience store clerk?

Originally posted by BackFire
Nothing.

It's completely within his right to challenge the ticket and refuse to sign for it if he doesn't agree with it. It's NOT within the cops right to taser a guy without warning for trying to explain himself.

Not saying the guy handled it in the best possible way, just that there was no reasonable grounds to taser him. the driver would have went home, not been tazed, simple as that. the cop was out of line, but the driver could have taken preventative actions to avoid the taze.

if a cop pulls a tazer on you and tells you to put your hands behind your back, even though you did nothing, what woudly you do?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
so by signing up for the situations you stated, in which they MAY be killed in the line of duty, wouldn't you say that they are more likely to fly off the handle far easier than say, a convenience store clerk?

I don't know how likely either situation is, too many variables.

What you seem to ALWAYS revert to, as you are now, is finding justification for cops losing their minds momentarily. I am not saying humans aren't capable of it, or incapable of being pushed too far.

My point is, if you cannot control that as a cop, where your job IS to remain calm, if only on the outside, in an effort to do a better, fairer job, then you simply should not be a cop. If you sign up knowing you cannot control it, and knowing you have a threshold that will likely be broken, then you are a psychopath who is honestly looking for a way to get away with a fight, as I'll now prove:

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
the driver could have taken preventative actions to avoid the taze.

If the cop recognised it wasn't necessary to tase the man, the man wouldn't have been tased either.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
if a cop pulls a tazer on you and tells you to put your hands behind your back, even though you did nothing, what woudly you do?

It doesn't matter. Look at what you JUST said, RJ.

"if a cop pulls a tazer on you and tells you to put your hands behind your back, even though you did nothing".

That is threat of abuse of power.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I don't know how likely either situation is, too many variables.

What you seem to ALWAYS revert to, as you are now, is finding justification for cops losing their minds momentarily. I am not saying humans aren't capable of it, or incapable of being pushed too far.

My point is, if you cannot control that as a cop, where your job IS to remain calm, if only on the outside, in an effort to do a better, fairer job, then you simply should not be a cop. If you sign up knowing you cannot control it, and knowing you have a threshold that will likely be broken, then you are a psychopath who is honestly looking for a way to get away with a fight.

-AC dodge.

It's not the citizens job to do all this shit to ensure that he isn't unjustly tased, it's the cops job to not unjustly tase people.

Honestly I'd probably recoil like that guy did, since there was zero warning at all. That's why he got tased, for his perfectly natural human response to perceived danger. And this happened because the cop botched the entire thing.

And the answer to your question about the clerk, RJ, is simple. Yes, a cop is probably more likely to fly off the handle. That doesn't make it any more acceptable. Just shows that guy probably shouldn't be a cop.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
so by signing up for the situations you stated, in which they MAY be killed in the line of duty, wouldn't you say that they are more likely to fly off the handle far easier than say, a convenience store clerk?

Should that make it acceptable? A doctor is far more likely to come over with a case of jitter hands in the middle of an operation, than a jockey, does this mean they shouldn't be held accountable for their actions?

A person should only enter employment knowing the risks, if they enter not knowing, it's their problem, if they enter knowing and still fvck up - it's still their problem.

If a member of the police force decides to one day go over the top and intentionally harm someone, they should be dealt with like everyone else.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
dodge.

How was it a dodge? I answered your question if you actually read my post.

Cops are more likely to FACE situations in which they may be pushed too far, but THE POINT OF BEING A COP is to NOT lose it on the outside, that is what you are failing to understand. Convenience store clerks are not bound by the same laws as cops. A convenience store clerk would get arrested if he did what the cop did.

YOUR point is: "They lose it, we should understand that.", nobody is MISunderstanding it. Point is, we do not think it's right to outwardly react.

-AC

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Should that make it acceptable? A doctor is far more likely to come over with a case of jitter hands in the middle of an operation, than a jockey, does this mean they shouldn't be held accountable for their actions?

A person should only enter employment knowing the risks, if they enter not knowing, it's their problem, if they enter knowing and still fvck up - it's still their problem.

If a member of the police force decides to one day go over the top and intentionally harm someone, they should be dealt with like everyone else. a doctor is operating on an idle body, an officer is dealing with someone conscious who, for all they, could be strapped. piss poor comparison.

also, you think ALL these oficers say to themselves "well I am gonna taze his ass, teach him a lesson?" I am sure some do, but for the most part they are acting on instinct, on reflex.

You are right when you say cops have a duty to uphold the law and not abuse their power. but wouldnt you also say that we, the general public, have a duty to cooperate with them, even when we think they are wrong?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
You are right when you say cops have a duty to uphold the law and not abuse their power. but wouldnt you also say that we, the general public, have a duty to cooperate with them, even when we think they are wrong?

You just defeated your own argument in more ways than I probably could have, which is saying something.

-AC

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
a doctor is operating on an idle body, an officer is dealing with someone conscious who, for all they, could be strapped. piss poor comparison.

also, you think ALL these oficers say to themselves "well I am gonna taze his ass, teach him a lesson?" I am sure some do, but for the most part they are acting on instinct, on reflex.

You are right when you say cops have a duty to uphold the law and not abuse their power. but wouldnt you also say that we, the general public, have a duty to cooperate with them, even when we think they are wrong?

But in the same light, is a citizen going to sit there why they are unjustly run over by the law?

I hate to do this...but.......My forefathers fought in the American Revolutionary War so that you could complain about people standing up for what is right.

To answer your question....hell no, if I was that dude (because I like to fight...I am not a bad ass by doing that either...more like a dumb ass.) I would have ripped those damned needles out ASAP and beat down some cowardly copper ass! (Pretend to be out of it and quickly rip out the needles...or better yet, grab/bear hug the cop so he won't taser you..heh heh.)

I have NEVER had ANY problems with ANY cops EVER. I am very very respectful and I do not argue. Therefore, I have never been tasered...I also have only been pulled over for my tail light being out and an expired tag...never been written a ticket...so I can't put myself in their shoes.

I also see what you are saying, RJ. Cops are going to be dicks because they have to deal with shit all day...you wouldn't want a nice grandma enforcing the law, would you?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I don't know how likely either situation is, too many variables.

What you seem to ALWAYS revert to, as you are now, is finding justification for cops losing their minds momentarily. I am not saying humans aren't capable of it, or incapable of being pushed too far."too many variables."......exactly my point. for all the cop knows, you could have a grenade in your pocket or an AK47 in the trunk.

so, these cops, in your opinion, are all just schoolyard bullies with mommy issues?



there is NO WAY the cop can know 100% whether it is necessary to taze the suspect, they do so to defuse a POTENTIALLY hazardous situation. lets say you and your buddy are out drinking and a cop stops you for PI. shit gets out of control, your buddy acts a fool, and he ends up shot dead on the pavement. If the cop had had the chance then and there to taze him, to prevent the shooting, would it be justified then?



It's not a threat of abuse of power, it;s the cop keeping the situation under control. when the driver started walking back towards his truck, for all the cop knew he was going for a weapon.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You just defeated your own argument in more ways than I probably could have, which is saying something.

-AC sure I did.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
How was it a dodge? I answered your question if you actually read my post.

Cops are more likely to FACE situations in which they may be pushed too far, but THE POINT OF BEING A COP is to NOT lose it on the outside, that is what you are failing to understand. Convenience store clerks are not bound by the same laws as cops. A convenience store clerk would get arrested if he did what the cop did.

YOUR point is: "They lose it, we should understand that.", nobody is MISunderstanding it. Point is, we do not think it's right to outwardly react.

-AC you missed my point entirely. my point was if a cop is more prone to overreact than an average citizen, why give them reason to? even if you think you aren't being threatening, and the cop perceives you as a threat, preventative action is always an option.

OK, the driver had some questions, fine. when the cop told him to put his hands behind his back, and the driver didn't, he went from traffic violator to threat. and then tried to walk away, making the officer perceive him as more of a threat.

It's not like the cop asked the driver to give him a BJ, all he asked was that he place his hands behind his back.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
but wouldnt you also say that we, the general public, have a duty to cooperate with them, even when we think they are wrong?

No.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
"too many variables."......exactly my point. for all the cop knows, you could have a grenade in your pocket or an AK47 in the trunk.

That's not what you are allowed to go by, though. It's reasonable possibility. If it's not a likely scenario, you're not bestowed the ability to act like it might be.

That's not what you are promoting though. We're discussing overly rough retaliation for someone pushing a cops buttons. Not "He might have a grenade.".

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
so, these cops, in your opinion, are all just schoolyard bullies with mommy issues?

I swear all my quote said was that if you sign up and still feel you have the right to abuse your power because some punk hit a nerve, then you shouldn't be a cop.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
there is NO WAY the cop can know 100% whether it is necessary to taze the suspect, they do so to defuse a POTENTIALLY hazardous situation. lets say you and your buddy are out drinking and a cop stops you for PI. shit gets out of control, your buddy acts a fool, and he ends up shot dead on the pavement. If the cop had had the chance then and there to taze him, to prevent the shooting, would it be justified then?

What's "act like a fool"? Let's make the scenario clear.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
It's not a threat of abuse of power, it;s the cop keeping the situation under control. when the driver started walking back towards his truck, for all the cop knew he was going for a weapon.

Yes, because it's beyond a cop to grab the guy, pull him away and put him on the ground, isn't it? He had to tase him.

-AC

Originally posted by Bardock42
No. care to elaborate?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
you missed my point entirely. my point was if a cop is more prone to overreact than an average citizen, why give them reason to? even if you think you aren't being threatening, and the cop perceives you as a threat, preventative action is always an option.

And you miss the point.

Cops who are prone to overreacting don't always need a reason, ie: everything is a reason, at that point. Do you not see that?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
OK, the driver had some questions, fine. when the cop told him to put his hands behind his back, and the driver didn't, he went from traffic violator to threat. and then tried to walk away, making the officer perceive him as more of a threat.

He didn't become a threat if he wasn't ever going to be one. The officer decided he was without good reason, at least not enough to tase him.

-AC

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
care to elaborate? Sure, we, the general public, should not have the duty to cooperate with every kind of bullshit a cop comes up with. We have rights, and the cops duty is to assure our rights are not limited. To mindlessly cooperate with a cop is not a duty of a citizen, example, a police officer has no right to randomly search your car, and you have no duty to cooperate if they do. It might be more intelligent, because Cops are crazy weirdos and might shoot you, but it is certainly not a duty.

Exactly.

If it's getting to the point where we should cooperate when cops are clearly in the wrong, in case we are murdered, then surely cops are the ones who need scrutiny here.

-AC

I honestly cannot understand, how RJ is failing to grasp this.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That's not what you are allowed to go by, though. It's reasonable possibility. If it's not a likely scenario, you're not bestowed the ability to act like it might be.

That's not what you are promoting though. We're discussing overly rough retaliation for someone pushing a cops buttons. Not "He might have a grenade.".actually, cops are empowered to assume someone is a threat and do whatever it takes to defuse the threat. But hey, let's just let the suspects in question do what they want, let's let them draw a piece, let's wait until it's too late and we have a dead cop/citizen on our hands.



then I agree with you. IF a cop has the mindset of "Man, I am gonna jack someone up today", they should not be a cop.



cop says to place his hands behind his back, friend resists, cop tries to force him on the ground, friend resists, use your imagination.



grab him and throw him on the ground. easier said than done. this could escalate to fisticuffs, where the suspect is far more prone to injury.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
actually, cops are empowered to assume someone is a threat and do whatever it takes to defuse the threat. But hey, let's just let the suspects in question do what they want, let's let them draw a piece, let's wait until it's too late and we have a dead cop/citizen on our hands.

EXACTLY.

It's for that reason that we need to start looking at these situations where cops say "THREAT!", and say "Wait, that was bs.", if it was actually bs. That's abuse of power.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
then I agree with you. IF a cop has the mindset of "Man, I am gonna jack someone up today", they should not be a cop.

Not even that. If you know you are prone to overreacting if buttons are pushed, then don't be a cop if you cannot bottle it up.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
cop says to place his hands behind his back, friend resists, cop tries to force him on the ground, friend resists, use your imagination.

You're just making up a scenario to suit yourself, though. If I were in that scenario, I would calm my friend down for his own benefit. If I knew he had no weapon and wasn't doing anything but being rowdy, then no, tasing isn't justified.

Cops are trained to be able to actually put people down. For crying out loud, Dog Chapman does it on a regular basis, and he hasn't even had training, he's some nobody.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
grab him and throw him on the ground. easier said than done. this could escalate to fisticuffs, where the suspect is far more prone to injury.

It won't escalate to fisticuffs because a cop SHOULD know better.

-AC

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
I honestly cannot understand, how RJ is failing to grasp this. I grasp it 100%. you guys are of the mindset that a cop has no right to assess a threat and act accordingly. so if a cop comes up to you and pulls you aside politely and wants to ask you a few questions, you tell him to bugger off?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
so if a cop comes up to you and pulls you aside politely and wants to ask you a few questions, you tell him to bugger off?

No, but if I did I don't deserve to be tased.

Besides, that's clearly not what happened here.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I grasp it 100%. you guys are of the mindset that a cop has no right to assess a threat and act accordingly. so if a cop comes up to you and pulls you aside politely and wants to ask you a few questions, you tell him to bugger off?

Why must you continually blow things out of proportion that we're not even saying?

All we are saying is, the way in which cops deem something to be a threat must be under constant watch. Due to it being a power of theirs, it can be abused. It's wrong.

-AC

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
actually, cops are empowered to assume someone is a threat and do whatever it takes to defuse the threat. But hey, let's just let the suspects in question do what they want, let's let them draw a piece, let's wait until it's too late and we have a dead cop/citizen on our hands.

No they're not. They have the power to attempt to defuse the threat that is going on at that time, they do not have power to assume and to attack without first asking questions.

Police do not have the power to assume when stopping someone for drink driving, that the minute their hands wander to their pockets they must have a weapon. That's not the way it works, assumption is not law enforcement, assumption is idiocy.

Example.

The Brazilian on the train. The cops had every right to subdue and detain the man.

Shoot him eight times in the head when he was secured? No.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Example.

The Brazilian on the train. The cops had every right to subdue and detain the man.

Shoot him eight times in the head when he was secured? No.

-AC That's also a terrible waste of taxpayers money. Any more than 2 bullets doesn't heighten the odds reasonably enough.

blah

anyone who doesn't get on their stomach when a pissed off cop tells them to is an idiot, or asking to be hurt in some way

I don't think saying that is defending the cop at all

Originally posted by inimalist
blah

anyone who doesn't get on their stomach when a pissed off cop tells them to is an idiot, or asking to be hurt in some way

I don't think saying that is defending the cop at all

I agree.

Doubt anyone denies that though.

lol, they didn't before apparently...

I didn't put it that clearly though

Originally posted by inimalist
lol, they didn't before apparently...

I didn't put it that clearly though I don't know...it just seems one of those things, you know? Run away when a mad bull chases you, don't accept nude pics of Rosie O'Donnell and get on your stomach when a crazy cop tells you to. The three things every human being knows.

Then there's that whole thing of standing up for a belief and willingly getting trodden upon, by a police officer/bull/Rosie O'Donell. It's the principle standing up for your legal rights and not taking shit from someone, just because they have a taser and a car with blue lights on.

In the most extreme example, that person is a revolutionary.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Then there's that whole thing of standing up for a belief and willingly getting trodden upon, by a police officer/bull/Rosie O'Donell. It's the principle standing up for your legal rights and not taking shit from someone, just because they have a taser and a car with blue lights on.

In the most extreme example, that person is a revolutionary. Oh, I didn't say it is wrong to do it, it might even be admirable...it's just really, really stupid.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
No they're not. They have the power to attempt to defuse the threat that is going on at that time, they do not have power to assume and to attack without first asking questions.

Police do not have the power to assume when stopping someone for drink driving, that the minute their hands wander to their pockets they must have a weapon. That's not the way it works, assumption is not law enforcement, assumption is idiocy. SO.....reactive and not proactive?

Originally posted by inimalist
blah

anyone who doesn't get on their stomach when a pissed off cop tells them to is an idiot, or asking to be hurt in some way

I don't think saying that is defending the cop at all agreed.

So we're all to just succumb to cops and give them unquestionable power?

-AC

I dunno, I thought there was that whole freedom thing, and such.

Originally posted by BackFire
I dunno, I thought there was that whole freedom thing, and such. Hey, I love freedom as much as the next one, I just love the ability to use it, supported by being not shot, just a little more.

There's a time to speak out for freedom, and it's not necessarily when a madman points a gun at you.

I agree.

Was just making sure that we knew that the madman would be in the wrong for trying to take away your freedoms.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
So we're all to just succumb to cops and give them unquestionable power?

-AC no, not at all. but they hold a certain degree of power, and we as a people should respect that.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
over exaggarate much?

Not at all. I'm being real, ey. I've dealt with...well...been dealt with by enough cops to know what I'm talking about.

Originally posted by chillmeistergen

Police do not have the power to assume when stopping someone for drink driving, that the minute their hands wander to their pockets they must have a weapon. That's not the way it works, assumption is not law enforcement, assumption is idiocy.

Oh, that is the way it works. Cops have so much discretion, that assumption is arguably law enforcement. A few years ago, I got stopped because my tags were expired, so I reached into my glove-compartment to get my registration and when I turned around the ****er was pointing a gun at my head porque he though I was reaching for a piece.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Not at all. I'm being real, ey. I've dealt with...well...been dealt with by enough cops to know what I'm talking about.


. and I wonder why they sought you out.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
and I wonder why they sought you out.

Racism.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
no, not at all. but they hold a certain degree of power, and we as a people should respect that.

Why SHOULD we? Just because they have it? Bit silly.

-AC

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Racism. no, 175 down the freeway. I am not a racist. me or the cops? if the cops, come on. thats a copout, no pun intended.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Why SHOULD we? Just because they have it? Bit silly.

-AC we should because putting their lives on the line to protect us is in the job description.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
no, 175 down the freeway. I am not a racist.

I've actually never been busted for street racing. (I'm too good)

I know you're not, I was talking about the cops.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
no, 175 down the freeway. I am not a racist. Lots of people are though. Police Officers included.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
no, not at all. but they hold a certain degree of power, and we as a people should respect that. Why are you so fascinated with respecting authority figures at all costs?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
we should because putting their lives on the line to protect us is in the job description.

That's what the piece of paper they sign says, but you think that's the motive and incentive for every person who wants a badge?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
I've actually never been busted for street racing. (I'm too good)

I know you're not, I was talking about the cops. thats why you lost to "the vato on the left?"


I know, I edited.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
thats why you lost to "the vato on the left?"


I know, I edited.

I lost to him because he wisely used timing when he punched the nitro.

I meant that I'm good at evading cops, due to my tracker.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
I lost to him because he wisely used timing when he punched the nitro.

I meant that I'm good at evading cops, due to my tracker. things are becoming a bit more clear now.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
no, not at all. but they hold a certain degree of power, and we as a people should respect that. Not to the point where one should fear for their personal safety if they question an instruction that is out of line and a breach of their rights.

Originally posted by SwindlingSmurph
Not to the point where one should fear for their personal safety if they question an instruction that is out of line and a breach of their rights. and on the opposite end of the scale, we shouldn't assume that we can say and do whatever we want to them without fear of reprecussion.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
we should because putting their lives on the line to protect us is in the job description.

So? It's not mandatory. I'm not respecting them for something they didn't HAVE to do, simply because they are "protecting" me. They are not going around "protecting" people.

They do what they can. I have never once been "saved" by the police, and I wouldn't respect them even if they did. It's like respecting a plumber for fixing your pipes.

The fact that it's more dangerous just makes me wonder why the hell you'd ever become a cop. It's not worthy of MY respect, like troops, or anyone aware of the job description. I don't respect anyone for that.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
and on the opposite end of the scale, we shouldn't assume that we can say and do whatever we want to them without fear of reprecussion.

You've got about 9 different arguments going, please just pick one.

Nobody is saying ANYONE deserves abuse, the MAIN argument is that cops do abuse their power, and therefore they get backtalk or worse, if they are abusing their power to make an arrest. You cannot say that simply because they have power we should never question it, or if we do, expect an ass-kicking.

You're essentially saying "Just take whatever they do or say.".

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
So? It's not mandatory. I'm not respecting them for something they didn't HAVE to do, simply because they are "protecting" me. They are not going around "protecting" people.

They do what they can. I have never once been "saved" by the police, and I wouldn't respect them even if they did. It's like respecting a plumber for fixing your pipes.

The fact that it's more dangerous just makes me wonder why the hell you'd ever become a cop. It's not worthy of MY respect, like troops, or anyone aware of the job description.

-AC OK then.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
and on the opposite end of the scale, we shouldn't assume that we can say and do whatever we want to them without fear of reprecussion.

If you're questioning instructions because they're given without cause, you shouldn't expect to be hit with however-many volts.

If you're making and following up on threats or serious attempts to resist arrest, tazering could be acceptable. At least, certainly more so than if you're simply asking for what you're charged with and the evidence of it.

Originally posted by SwindlingSmurph
If you're questioning instructions because they're given without cause, you shouldn't expect to be hit with however-many volts.

If you're making and following up on threats or serious attempts to resist arrest, tazering could be acceptable. At least, certainly more so than if you're simply asking for what you're charged with and the evidence of it. *sighs* We've already been over this.....

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
So? It's not mandatory. I'm not respecting them for something they didn't HAVE to do, simply because they are "protecting" me. They are not going around "protecting" people.

They do what they can. I have never once been "saved" by the police, and I wouldn't respect them even if they did. It's like respecting a plumber for fixing your pipes.

The fact that it's more dangerous just makes me wonder why the hell you'd ever become a cop. It's not worthy of MY respect, like troops, or anyone aware of the job description. I don't respect anyone for that.

-AC

You're deliberately being ignorant to the fact that those are NECESSARY JOBS for a society for function in an orderly fashion; you live a far more comfortable and safe life because there are people who are willing to take those dangerous jobs, you ass.

You're the type of guy that will shit on a police man, fireman or soldier simply because it's the "rebel" thing to do, yet you'll be the first to cry for help like date-raped floozy if someone steals your valuables or if your house catches on fire, ass.

If you can't see the difference between respecting a fireman and a skydiving instructor, you need to pull your head out of your ass.

Edit: I said "ass" three times, I met my quota.

I don't like things that don't feel good.

Originally posted by Robtard
You're deliberately being ignorant to the fact that those are NECESSARY JOBS for a society for function in an orderly fashion; you live a far more comfortable and safe life because there are people who are willing to take those dangerous jobs, you ass.

You're the type of guy that will shit on a police man, fireman or soldier simply because it's the "rebel" thing to do, yet you'll be the first to cry for help like date-raped floozy if someone steals your valuables or if your house catches on fire, ass.

If you can't see the difference between respecting a fireman and a skydiving instructor, you need to pull your head out of your ass.

Edit: I said "ass" three times, I met my quota. uh oh.

Poor Robtard is gonna get his ass torn into.

AC never loses debates

Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
Poor Robtard is gonna get his ass torn into.

AC never loses debates he certainly has, I have seen it first hand.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
he certainly has, I have seen it first hand.

Do tell.

And "Loss" please, not someone you like posting at me, and you agreeing. Bear in mind, I'm not technically denying the premise, I'm asking where you've seen it.

Originally posted by Robtard
You're deliberately being ignorant to the fact that those are NECESSARY JOBS for a society for function in an orderly fashion; you live a far more comfortable and safe life because there are people who are willing to take those dangerous jobs, you ass.

Hahaha, so? Great, thanks to them. I appreciate it and everything.

I also appreciate someone fixing my pipes.

Originally posted by Robtard
You're the type of guy that will shit on a police man, fireman or soldier simply because it's the "rebel" thing to do, yet you'll be the first to cry for help like date-raped floozy if someone steals your valuables or if your house catches on fire, ass.

I'm not "shitting" on them, stop being such a vagina drip.

I'm saying I don't have to RESPECT them for what they do. Appreciate it, sure. Thanks and everything, but respect is not earned from doing that. If you cannot handle the fact that I simply see no reason to respect policemen or whatever, then tough shit.

I don't respect waiters for bringing my food to me, they chose to do it. It doesn't mean I won't go into a restaurant and expect their service. Who gives a shit? They have chosen to be cops unquestionably, me not respecting them for it does not mean I am void of asking them to do their jobs.

You're just being a cop out (No pun intended) by saying I do it because it's the rebel thing to do. I'm not, I really don't respect them. I'm not saying I'm out there shitting on them, hoping they get hurt, hoping they get killed. I am just not giving them additional respect simply because they COULD die.

Originally posted by Robtard
If you can't see the difference between respecting a fireman and a skydiving instructor, you need to pull your head out of your ass.

And if you can't see the fact that it is possible to not "respect" either but also not to wish harm on either, then you need to leave, don't you?

Originally posted by Robtard
Edit: I said "ass" three times, I met my quota.

Lovely.

-AC

heh heh.. see?

Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
Poor Robtard is gonna get his ass torn into.

AC never loses debates

He loses debates all the time. He's really easy to distract.

Just send him some pictures of dicks and he won't be able to concentrate on anything else.

Are you sure you're not getting him confused with your twin, BF?

Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk


Are you sure you're not getting him confused with your twin, BF?

No.

But VVD has the same problem.

Originally posted by BackFire
He loses debates all the time. He's really easy to distract.

Just send him some pictures of dicks and he won't be able to concentrate on anything else.

This isn't a win/lose situation, Blax.

I firmly believe that people sorely misunderstanding the debates I'm in, and needlessly kissing my ass, is what has generated such a backlash against me.

It's Robtard's opinion Vs mine.

EDIT: Why reveal stuff, BF?

-AC

Because that stuff is interesting and funny, and gay.

Why do that, though?

You can clearly see I'm in a debate. Now if Robtard sends me pictures of dicks, what can I do?

-AC

It will be a good way to test your self control.

And Robtard won't send you pictures of dicks, he's greedy, he'll keep them all for himself because he likes them too.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
This isn't a win/lose situation, Blax.

I firmly believe that people sorely misunderstanding the debates I'm in, and needlessly kissing my ass, is what has generated such a backlash against me.

It's Robtard's opinion Vs mine.

EDIT: Why reveal stuff, BF?

-AC

t'was just a joke/ instigating more arguing/trolling spam post, man.

That wasn't specifically aimed at you, the rest I mean.

Just something that has occured to me due to the reactions of a few others.

-AC