This is the consequence of the war on drugs. [modified]
-
Is marijuana really so bad that they have to SWAT people over a gram of it? Just because someone has a history of drug charges that doesn't mean they need to be SWATed over a gram of marijuana, or any amount for that matter. It is clear that he wasn't selling it, its clear the police overeacted, and its clear that the war on drugs is a nightmare worse the prohibition of alcohol. He was charged with a little misdemeanor, you get those for littering. Are you saying that anyone who commits a little misdemeanor deserves a SWAT team to break into their home, kill their dogs, and terrorize their family? For a little misdemeanor?
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Is marijuana really so bad that they have to SWAT people over a gram of it?
Are you really so stupid that you cannot understand that the SWAT team raid was not because of one gram of marijuana?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Just because someone has a history of drug charges that doesn't mean they need to be SWATed over a gram of marijuana,
Are you really so stupid that you cannot understand that the SWAT team raid was not because of one gram of marijuana?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
or any amount for that matter.
So you don't think that criminals and gangsters (your words) dealing in drugs merit the police protecting themselves against an armed response?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
It is clear that he wasn't selling it
After the raid, it was clear that he wasn't selling from his house.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
its clear the police overeacted
No. The police were quite correct in taking precautions against a criminal drug dealer resisting arrest.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
its clear that the war on drugs is a nightmare worse the prohibition of alcohol.
No argument with that.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
He was charged with a little misdemeanor, you get those for littering.
So? They charged him with what the evidence supported.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Are you saying that anyone who commits a little misdemeanor deserves a SWAT team to break into their home, kill their dogs, and terrorize their family? For a little misdemeanor?
Again, are you really so stupid that you cannot understand that the SWAT team raid was not because of a little misdemeanour? Seeing a bus waiting at the stop, I decide to run to catch it. When I reach the stop: a) Route 22 - great, my bus - the run was worthwhile; b) Route 49 - not my bus - the run was not worthwhile. It is only after the run that I can determine whether that run was worthwhile or not. Does that simple analogy assist you in understanding that your whinge is purely about being wise after the event?
Bob Emmett CSS: I don't intend to be a
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Is marijuana really so bad that they have to SWAT people over a gram of it?
Are you really so stupid that you cannot understand that the SWAT team raid was not because of one gram of marijuana?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Just because someone has a history of drug charges that doesn't mean they need to be SWATed over a gram of marijuana,
Are you really so stupid that you cannot understand that the SWAT team raid was not because of one gram of marijuana?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
or any amount for that matter.
So you don't think that criminals and gangsters (your words) dealing in drugs merit the police protecting themselves against an armed response?
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
It is clear that he wasn't selling it
After the raid, it was clear that he wasn't selling from his house.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
its clear the police overeacted
No. The police were quite correct in taking precautions against a criminal drug dealer resisting arrest.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
its clear that the war on drugs is a nightmare worse the prohibition of alcohol.
No argument with that.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
He was charged with a little misdemeanor, you get those for littering.
So? They charged him with what the evidence supported.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Are you saying that anyone who commits a little misdemeanor deserves a SWAT team to break into their home, kill their dogs, and terrorize their family? For a little misdemeanor?
Again, are you really so stupid that you cannot understand that the SWAT team raid was not because of a little misdemeanour? Seeing a bus waiting at the stop, I decide to run to catch it. When I reach the stop: a) Route 22 - great, my bus - the run was worthwhile; b) Route 49 - not my bus - the run was not worthwhile. It is only after the run that I can determine whether that run was worthwhile or not. Does that simple analogy assist you in understanding that your whinge is purely about being wise after the event?
Bob Emmett CSS: I don't intend to be a
If they are going to conduct a search warrent, it needs to be civil. You don't need SWAT to burst in and shoot their dogs to conduct a search warrent on a middle class family while they are nearly sleeping. Two police officers could have civil knocked on the door and searched the house. This would have never happened if it weren't for the war on drugs, the guy might be a professional business owner instead of a criminal slapped by SWAT with a minor misdemeanor.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
If they are going to conduct a search warrent, it needs to be civil. You don't need SWAT to burst in and shoot their dogs to conduct a search warrent on a middle class family while they are nearly sleeping. Two police officers could have civil knocked on the door and searched the house. This would have never happened if it weren't for the war on drugs, the guy might be a professional business owner instead of a criminal slapped by SWAT with a minor misdemeanor.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
If they are going to conduct a search warrent, it needs to be civil.
Not if you are raiding the home of a convicted criminal, a distributor of cocaine and marijuana, with a history of violence.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
You don't need SWAT to burst in and shoot their dogs to conduct a search warrent on a middle class family while they are nearly sleeping.
I had to protect a middle class wife and her middle class daughter from their axe wielding middle class husband and father. :-\ You hold the middle classes in too much respect. But he wasn't middle class, was he? He was a convicted criminal, a distributor of cocaine and marijuana, with a history of violence.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Two police officers could have civil knocked on the door and searched the house.
Yeah, right. A convicted criminal, a distributor of cocaine and marijuana, with a history of violence, with the right to bear arms.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
This would have never happened if it weren't for the war on drugs
We've already agreed on that. It is irrelevant to your whinge.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
slapped by SWAT with a minor misdemeanor
Again, are you really so stupid that you cannot understand that the SWAT team raid was not because of a minor misdemeanour? The police were acting on a tip that Whitworth had a large amount of high-grade marijuana in his home. US citizens have the right to bear arms. You yourself wrote it is illegal so the criminals and gangs take over the market. So, as a known distributor of cocaine and marijuana, with a history of violence, it is not unreasonable for the police to assume that Whitworth might be armed and potentially dangerous; and seek to overwhelm any possible armed response. BTW: Which part of 'being wise after the event' did you not understand? Try 'with the benefit of hindsight', do you understand that?
Bob Emmett CSS: I don't intend to be a technical writing, I intend to be a software engineer.
-
No explanation necessary. Just watch SWAT in action.[^] Nobody asked anybody to get the dog, they just shoot it.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
modified on Friday, May 7, 2010 10:19 PM
shut up moron, you know nothing about the war on drugs, because you and many others doing drugs, over 22,ooo have died in Mexico in this stupid war. It's your fault, you deserve it and be sure, if the US doesn´t stop buying drugs, violence will not stay in Mexico all the time and one day someone in your block will get killed, you will not be able to go out without the fear of been shot. You created this, you deserve it, so instead of crying go outside and tell your junky friends to stop using drugs...
I want to die like my grandfather- asleep, not like the passengers in his car, screaming!
-
shut up moron, you know nothing about the war on drugs, because you and many others doing drugs, over 22,ooo have died in Mexico in this stupid war. It's your fault, you deserve it and be sure, if the US doesn´t stop buying drugs, violence will not stay in Mexico all the time and one day someone in your block will get killed, you will not be able to go out without the fear of been shot. You created this, you deserve it, so instead of crying go outside and tell your junky friends to stop using drugs...
I want to die like my grandfather- asleep, not like the passengers in his car, screaming!
You can't stop people from drinking or doing drugs, but you can stop the crime and drug violence by making drugs legal like alcohol and caffeine. You fucking understand? Of course you don't, you are third world scum.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
You can't stop people from drinking or doing drugs, but you can stop the crime and drug violence by making drugs legal like alcohol and caffeine. You fucking understand? Of course you don't, you are third world scum.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Of course you don't, you are third world scum.
To (almost) quote Captain SchutzStaffel[^]: You are an elitist, opinionated snob who instantly dismiss (sic) anything that doesn't fit your marxist racist ideals, especially if it comes from someone who has different political leanings.
Bob Emmett CSS: I don't intend to be a technical writing, I intend to be a software engineer.
-
OK, I listened to it again, trying to hear what you said. Much as it pains me, you are right, it was "Police Department, don't move."
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
They did it because he had a gram of marijuana, they charged him with a misdemeanor. They had a database on him so they really wanted to teach him a lesson this time.
I knew a woman who was sure she knew what other people were thinking, even if she was told otherwise by the people. She needs to be on more meds than I. You remind me of her. Did they know ahead of time that he only had a gram? How do you know why they did it? You know facts: Guy had a history. They had a tip. You can bitch about breaking the door without giving them time to open it. You can bitch that they should have tasered the dog. Either one of us drawing conclusions about their state of mind is just bullshit, beyond normal dealing with a known felon with an attack dog.
Opacity, the new Transparency.
This is how i think CSS would of liked it to of gone down Police: Hello, we have reason to belive that you are a drug dealer Dealer: Me, no never policeman Police: Well, were coming to check can we arrange for Tuesday 16th May Also, please make sure that you haven't moved any of your drugs and have all harmful animals locked up safely and the children are out of the house, I know we'll move them for you at 9am? Dealer: Yeah sure man i'll be there 10am ok?
Marc Clifton wrote:
That has nothing to do with VB. - Oh crap. I just defended VB!
-
No explanation necessary. Just watch SWAT in action.[^] Nobody asked anybody to get the dog, they just shoot it.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
modified on Friday, May 7, 2010 10:19 PM
While you again distort the video to fit your agenda, I actually agree on the underlying issue. The "War on Drugs" was a bad call and we need to switch tactics. Prohibition didn't work, I doubt it will.
If I have accidentally said something witty, smart, or correct, it is purely by mistake and I apologize for it.
-
You can't stop people from drinking or doing drugs, but you can stop the crime and drug violence by making drugs legal like alcohol and caffeine. You fucking understand? Of course you don't, you are third world scum.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
I'm a third world scum with a masters degree, do you have a masters degree? do you even have high school? with a job, do you have a job? or are you using the taxes I pay for your welfare?, you can call me any name you like, but I'm not a racist junkie living in a basement. You can't understand the problem you don't understand the problem, it's not about legalizing the drugs, imagine now 100 million junkies like you driving cars while high, if alcohol is now a problem, imagine now alcohol and weed together. People is not capable of being responsible of their acts, just look at yourself, blaming others because you're not capable of having a life, imagine now when you decide to drive after smoking weed and drinking alcohol... poor people that is going to be between you and the wall you decide to crash because it's cooooooool!!!
I want to die like my grandfather- asleep, not like the passengers in his car, screaming!
-
I'm a third world scum with a masters degree, do you have a masters degree? do you even have high school? with a job, do you have a job? or are you using the taxes I pay for your welfare?, you can call me any name you like, but I'm not a racist junkie living in a basement. You can't understand the problem you don't understand the problem, it's not about legalizing the drugs, imagine now 100 million junkies like you driving cars while high, if alcohol is now a problem, imagine now alcohol and weed together. People is not capable of being responsible of their acts, just look at yourself, blaming others because you're not capable of having a life, imagine now when you decide to drive after smoking weed and drinking alcohol... poor people that is going to be between you and the wall you decide to crash because it's cooooooool!!!
I want to die like my grandfather- asleep, not like the passengers in his car, screaming!
The war on drugs does not decrease drug use. You claim to have a masters degree but you have the mind of a third worlder. No degree will change that. Now go bow to your Che poster.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]