• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:162] Florida Moves to Allow Shooting of Looters and Rioters Threatening Property

Oh, so last summer, but not now. So why is this an issue now, his he trying to scare the people of Florida and distract them from the fact that the governor himself is literally trying to kill them by opening up everything during a Pandemic?

Another reason to shoot looters. They are spreading covid-19, literally trying to kill people while also looting.
 
Another reason to shoot looters. They are spreading covid-19, literally trying to kill people while also looting.

"Well, officer, I felt threatened... By their germs..."

:ROFLMAO:
 
The OP is soaked in racism as intended.

Mr. Wray knows far better than you what constitutes domestic terrorism.
and I know far better than you do. so I guess its a wash
 
Rhakron, I agree that we need to do what we can to stop looting, but cops have special training to recognize certain situations before shooting, while the average person doesn't.

For example, during an otherwise peaceful protest, some nut throws a brick through a store window. Among those who run toward the window is a girl who is trying to catch up to her boyfriend and pull him back. The owner opens fire. Several people are killed, including the girl friend.

Cops are trained to keep a cool head and shoot only if necessary and if the correct target has clearly been identified.

Again, I'm in favor of almost anything that will stop looters, but that particular idea just looks a little too dangerous (to me).
The girlfriend should not be dating a man who would break a window nor should she be in a dangerous position like that. She Should be held liable for her death in your scenario.
 
According to Trumps FBI Director, white supremacist groups pose the greatest domestic terror threat to the United States.

So take your "Leftist" BS and ............

It’s a fake political narrative created by leftists.
 
Florida's DeSantis moves to allow citizens to shoot looters, rioters targeting businesses

I support this 100%. If violent Leftist mobs are going to become an increasingly common feature of American domestic life, and if law enforcement is going to be too chickensh*t to do anything about it, or if agenda-driven politicians are going to actually be complicit in allowing the violence to continue, then common citizens need to be formally empowered to defend themselves and their livelihoods without fear of malicious prosecution.

Situations like these are literally the entire reason the 2nd Amendment exists. The American people are not meant to be defenseless sheep, at the mercy of either government, or their lawless peers. Property rights are human rights, and should be defended as such by those who are able.
First, looting is stealing and not violence, as you asserted. So, Florida is sanctioning killing someone suspected of stealing. When we allow citizens to shoot other suspected thieves with little restraint, what do you think happens? More citizens get shot and at least some of them will be unjustified. The definition of "looting" isn't precise and will be defined by the shopkeeper as shoplifting. So, Florida is sanctioning shooting shoplifters, without trial, in a state whose penalty for shoplifting isn't death.

Moreover, the 2nd Amendment's purpose was to provide for a citizen army, in the absence of a national standing army. It had nothing to do with stopping store thieves.
 
According to Trumps FBI Director, white supremacist groups pose the greatest domestic terror threat to the United States.

So take your "Leftist" BS and ............



It’s a fake political narrative created by leftists.
The FBI is run by leftists that created a "fake political narrative," who knew?

Couldn't possibly be that white supremacist groups pose the greatest domestic terror threat to the United States.
 
First, looting is stealing and not violence, as you asserted. So, Florida is sanctioning killing someone suspected of stealing. When we allow citizens to shoot other suspected thieves with little restraint, what do you think happens? More citizens get shot and at least some of them will be unjustified. The definition of "looting" isn't precise and will be defined by the shopkeeper as shoplifting. So, Florida is sanctioning shooting shoplifters, without trial, in a state whose penalty for shoplifting isn't death.

Moreover, the 2nd Amendment's purpose was to provide for a citizen army, in the absence of a national standing army. It had nothing to do with stopping store thieves.
you are wrong about the second amendment-its main purpose was guaranteeing the right of self defense. Looting-when done by a mob, is a clear and present danger to the lives of those in the area. Shooting a few looters usually ends that activity being a clear and present danger. that means people smashing windows, looting stores etc. You are also confused in the sense that you shoot looters to stop a dangerous activity-its not"Punishment"
 
Who cares what Florida does to itself?
 
you are wrong about the second amendment-its main purpose was guaranteeing the right of self defense. Looting-when done by a mob, is a clear and present danger to the lives of those in the area. Shooting a few looters usually ends that activity being a clear and present danger. that means people smashing windows, looting stores etc. You are also confused in the sense that you shoot looters to stop a dangerous activity-its not"Punishment"
BS.
See Federalist 29:
"THE power of regulating the militia, and of commanding its services in times of insurrection and invasion are natural incidents to the duties of superintending the common defense, and of watching over the internal peace of the Confederacy.
..."
 
BS.
See Federalist 29:
"THE power of regulating the militia, and of commanding its services in times of insurrection and invasion are natural incidents to the duties of superintending the common defense, and of watching over the internal peace of the Confederacy.
..."
that has no relevance to what I said, and guess what the federalist papers are what in terms of controlling authority?
 
The FBI is run by leftists that created a "fake political narrative," who knew?

Couldn't possibly be that white supremacist groups pose the greatest domestic terror threat to the United States.
Yes. The media structure and the common opinion among the elite class is that “diversity is our strength” and other such nonsense and because this is a near religious belief any criticism of the left must be couched in terms of race.
They created the theory then back filled it.
Then they use definitions that are suspect and not commonly accepted, and when necessary just make stuff up.
 
The girlfriend should not be dating a man who would break a window nor should she be in a dangerous position like that. She Should be held liable for her death in your scenario.

Sure, EMN--"Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out." That should work fine until it's one of your loved ones who gets killed. I'm just sayin'.
 
Sure, EMN--"Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out." That should work fine until it's one of your loved ones who gets killed. I'm just sayin'.
My loved ones are not joining mobs of people destroying property.
 
DHS has been very clear that the number one terror threat in America right now is right-wing extremists.

If rightists could show that they are serious about reigning in the worst of their own, perhaps they could restore some credibility. Instead they just scream ANNNTEEEEEEFFUUUUHHHHH all the time.

Rightists?

I know plenty of Democrats who would shoot as well.

It doesn't matter if it's supremacist's or thugs, a person has the right to protect is person and property.
 
My loved ones are not joining mobs of people destroying property.

EMN, maybe I didn't explain it right, but in my original example, I said it was a peaceful demonstration. Just because some nut who got involved breaks a window to loot, doesn't mean that all his friends there deserve to die with him.

Here's a better example (I hope). Have you ever seen that old film of George Wallace getting shot? He had finished a speech in a mall parking lot, and he went into the crowd to shake hands. Well, some nut pulled out a gun, reached between the people surrounding Wallace and shot him several times. The police grabbed the shooter's arm and wrestled him down.

Now, think what would have happened if the police had simply opened fire into the crowd in order to kill the shooter.

That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. I know you're not saying this, but killing innocent people--or even putting them at risk--in order to get the criminal is never a good idea.
 
Creating you own scenarios now?

Yes, in order to illustrate the point I'm trying to make.

I'm not trying to drag you in on this, so it's okay if you don't respond, but as a retired service member, certainly you wouldn't shoot into a crowd like that, would you?
 
EMN, maybe I didn't explain it right, but in my original example, I said it was a peaceful demonstration. Just because some nut who got involved breaks a window to loot, doesn't mean that all his friends there deserve to die with him.

Here's a better example (I hope). Have you ever seen that old film of George Wallace getting shot? He had finished a speech in a mall parking lot, and he went into the crowd to shake hands. Well, some nut pulled out a gun, reached between the people surrounding Wallace and shot him several times. The police grabbed the shooter's arm and wrestled him down.

Now, think what would have happened if the police had simply opened fire into the crowd in order to kill the shooter.

That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. I know you're not saying this, but killing innocent people--or even putting them at risk--in order to get the criminal is never a good idea.
When a mob of people gather and one breaks a window it is by definition not a peaceful demonstration. Furthermore let’s be frank, all leftist demonstrations are exercises in violence or the threat of it. “Hey hey ho ho [insert pet cause here] has got to go” is in and of itself a demand that their cause be championed as policy even if it goes against elections and the political process.

so if it’s a left wing cause, stay out of a demonstration for it. Because it is either violence or the threat of it.
 
When a mob of people gather and one breaks a window it is by definition not a peaceful demonstration. Furthermore let’s be frank, all leftist demonstrations are exercises in violence or the threat of it. “Hey hey ho ho [insert pet cause here] has got to go” is in and of itself a demand that their cause be championed as policy even if it goes against elections and the political process.

so if it’s a left wing cause, stay out of a demonstration for it. Because it is either violence or the threat of it.

EMN, I think we have more in common than we realize. We probably just disagree on the penalty for participating in a protest that has the potential of becoming violent. We might even disagree on who should be called "innocent" and who shouldn't be. I guess we'll just have to chalk it up (no reference to a chalk outline :) ) to differences of outlook, which is okay. As a friend of mine says, "Worst things happen at sea." :)
 
Yes. The media structure and the common opinion among the elite class is that “diversity is our strength” and other such nonsense and because this is a near religious belief any criticism of the left must be couched in terms of race.
They created the theory then back filled it.
Then they use definitions that are suspect and not commonly accepted, and when necessary just make stuff up.
Hope you enjoyed your word salad.
 
Rightists?

I know plenty of Democrats who would shoot as well.

It doesn't matter if it's supremacist's or thugs, a person has the right to protect is person and property.
The issue comes down to someone with nearly zero training opening fire on people. If someone’s life is being threatened, use force. If someone breaks in your home, use force. If a CVS is being broken into let the cops who are trained handle it.

Right now it’s typically one group that has guns..the right wing wanna be militia’s and “protectors”. The ramping up of violence by these groups is going to lead to others bringing guns and much worse situations.
 
:ROFLMAO:

And they're full sh*t. What of it?

Literally the only reason it appears that Right Wing groups are more violent is because the biased Left Wing academics who compile the data categorically refuse to classify street violence by Leftist groups like BLM or ANTIFA as being domestic terror activity, in spite of clearly meeting the text-book definition of the term.

i.e. "the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."
Well, if you would include Black bloc and professional thieves in your assessments we might.

But you don't.

Becaaue that would apply nuance to your narratives that don't paint the BLM protesters as the ones doing the wrecking and looting.

I'm.sure there is "monkey see, monkey do" participation by some who went to protest but jumped in to break some windows or get some new kicks. That is human nature.

At best you say "antifa", which is really a group like the proud boys or patriot prayer who have been going to protests to fight with each other.l for years.

Black Bloc has been using liberal protests as cover to vanadalize for decades.

And professional thieves have been using the protests as cover to get their crime on in a pandemic.

But all we hear from y'all is "BLM is burning american cities".

None of which have been anywhere near what one would accurately call "burning down". The vast majority of property damage is graffiti.
 
Portland and Seattle have literally been on fire for four straight months. Communist militant groups have literally taken control of urban centers using armed force, and attempted to establish independent Leftist micro-states, in several different US cities.

By all means, do tell me how "Buckwheat and Cleetus," the backwoods Georgia rednecks who occasionally post racist memes on Stormfront, are a bigger threat to national security than that. :rolleyes:
Bull ****ing shit.

I was in both Portland and Seattle in September. Went to both "epicenters"

The federal building complex in Portland, CHOP/CHAZ in Seattle.

Nary a fire to be seen burning in either of those cities. Hell, all the damage I could find was within a block or two from those epicenters. And interestingly the houses across the street from the CHOP park in Seattle were completely intact. I had to look hard to find a couple of places where graffiti had been painted over.

But not one single burned out building did I see. No smoke in any direction.

This is why we can't have nice things. Y'all swallow whole every single thing your media and trump tell you. Which causes you to have a reality all your own, distinct from that of the rest of the world, found only in conservative media.

So yeah. Even in San Diego we had a couple of banks burned in la mesa.

Weeks ago. Nothing since.

No cities are burning in America. That is a gross, deliberate exaggeration.

Graffiti, broken windows, dumpster fires are the reality for the most part.

Neither city was burning when I was there and there was no evidence they had been unless you can build skyscrapers in days and faux them up to make it look like they've been there for decades.
 
Back
Top Bottom