|
silence_kit posted:I'm shocked that posters in this thread are against the death penalty given that many posters periodically fantasize in this thread about the execution of Republicans and violent secession of California from the Union whenever their favorite politicians are not in power in the Federal government. So much for the tolerant left!
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 05:17 |
|
|
silence_kit posted:I'm shocked that posters in this thread are against the death penalty given that many posters periodically fantasize in this thread about the execution of Republicans and violent secession of California from the Union whenever their favorite politicians are not in power in the Federal government. It's pretty sad that you can't distinguish between fiction and reality.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:37
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:I'm shocked that posters in this thread are against the death penalty given that many posters periodically fantasize in this thread about the execution of Republicans and violent secession of California from the Union whenever their favorite politicians are not in power in the Federal government. And they said IMAX went out of style.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:I'm shocked that posters in this thread are against the death penalty given that many posters periodically fantasize in this thread about the execution of Republicans and violent secession of California from the Union whenever their favorite politicians are not in power in the Federal government. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:I'm shocked that posters in this thread are against the death penalty given that many posters periodically fantasize in this thread about the execution of Republicans and violent secession of California from the Union whenever their favorite politicians are not in power in the Federal government. I don't think anyone has ever supported California seceding in this thread homie
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
gently caress SNEEP posted:I don't think anyone has ever supported California seceding in this thread homie that's what them california pinkos believe now, apparently you heard it from that guy first
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:that's what them california pinkos believe now, apparently The weird thing is it's usually not the pinkos. Of the prominent movements, one was transparently Putinist, another was transparently techbro*, and the last thought a third party could accomplish anything good ever in a first-past-the-post system. *No, not the Six Californias jerk, the other one that wanted to remove the shackles from California's ability to compete.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:I'm shocked that posters in this thread are against the death penalty given that many posters periodically fantasize in this thread about the execution of Republicans and violent secession of California from the Union whenever their favorite politicians are not in power in the Federal government. Executing republicans is unnecessary at this point. We're now about executing obstructionist centrist dems.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:The fact that we allow criminals to go free when evidence is improperly gathered is only because we have embraced an adversarial legal system as a check on government power, not because it is morally correct. silence_kit posted:I'm shocked that posters in this thread are against the death penalty given that many posters periodically fantasize in this thread about the execution of Republicans No one thinks that Republicans deserve trials. Lets stay serious.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
The Wiggly Wizard posted:Executing republicans is unnecessary at this point. We're now about executing obstructionist centrist dems. THIS. poo poo. RIGHT. HERE. FAM.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2017 23:19
|
|
|
dont be mean to me posted:The weird thing is it's usually not the pinkos. Of the prominent movements, one was transparently Putinist, another was transparently techbro*, and the last thought a third party could accomplish anything good ever in a first-past-the-post system. Yeah, I'm actually fond of thinking of Calfornia as a distinct country/nation/community, but I still think "Calexit" is a retarded fantasy for political manchildren. People who want California to "stand apart" would be better off trying to figure out what it means to be Californian, how we can represent communities besides LA and the Bay, why our state government is so inept and dysfunctional, and why our local politics are a tribalistic clusterfuck dominated by old nimbys, niche advocacy groups, and partisan hacks. I love California and we're a big, rich state with massive potential, but anyone who has actually gotten involved with California politics can tell you just how horrifically unprepared we are to "go it alone." Even if secession were feasible (lol no), it would still be a vastly longer, harder, and more destructive road than just waiting for the reality show presidency to end. Plus, um, most of us actually like being American.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
1 in 8 Americans is also a Californian. It's our country, and no one acting in our best interest would tell us to leave it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 04:43
|
|
|
so you're saying it's less leaving and more kicking the other states out? i mean, secession has been pretty thoroughly settled but iunno about expulsion. e: being flippant, I do not support CA leaving the union
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 04:49
|
|
|
No one sane does. The United States provides a lifetime and counting of guarantees for international trade and diplomacy and just tons of our logistical needs (such as water and power). In turn, California provides tons of tax revenue and goods and services (even finished goods once again), and a political ratchet limiting how much damage garden-variety turds can do once in office - while dragging the other States kicking and screaming into the 20th century via its sheer size alone. The problem is that this isn't a time for the sane. The concept of bipartisanship (indeed, of cooperation in general) was basically ruined for the foreseeable future before the current Spite House, which would want to see us destroyed out of sheer revenge for not falling into line last November and not being sibilant servants of New York or whatever - and if North Korea got to 'do' North Korea, his public vindication, the emergence of a new common enemy for the world that ISN'T America, and the worst elements of an already atavistic and misanthropic Republican Party getting to run roughshod over the Union until* it falls apart would be merely frosting. *This not being 'unless' is certain, but cold comfort indeed, given that their party seems hellbent on choking out and drowning the world in a vain and futile bid to make God save them out of pity (read: literally trying to rules-lawyer God). dont be mean to me fucked around with this message at 05:27 on Aug 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 05:18
|
|
|
What are the odds of shitheads like Duncan Hunter Jr., Issa, or Rohrbacher getting voted off Congress island this go round? Do the Dems have reasonable candidates?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 06:36
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:What are the odds of shitheads like Duncan Hunter Jr., Issa, or Rohrbacher getting voted off Congress island this go round? Do the Dems have reasonable candidates? For Issa and Rohrbacher's districts, they definitely do. I know that in CA-48, one of them, Harley Rouda, has been buying near-constant Facebook ads. (I'm in a nearby district but I still see his ads). The guy who ran against Issa last year and came within a hairsbreadth of beating him is running again along with some other challengers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 06:57
|
|
|
Instant Sunrise posted:For Issa and Rohrbacher's districts, they definitely do. I know that in CA-48, one of them, Harley Rouda, has been buying near-constant Facebook ads. (I'm in a nearby district but I still see his ads). The guy who ran against Issa last year and came within a hairsbreadth of beating him is running again along with some other challengers. San Diego Dems have a proud tradition of ignoring East County, but given the depths of Hunter's idiocy, they might get off their asses just this once.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 09:43
|
|
|
Duckbag posted:Dude, no. The evidence was excluded because it was inadmissable. The cops/DA aren't getting "punished." They just hosed up a case because they were bad at their jobs. There is no other way to parse this sentence than as a statement that the purpose/benefit of the exclusionary rule is to deter misbehavior by police and prosecutors: Trabisnikof posted:If deterrence works then failing on such a high profile case will be a better deterrent to future bad action by police and prosecutors rather than letting them abuse the law and still get their way. Cup Runneth Over posted:Just because people are saying the prosecutors deserved it doesn't mean it was actually a punishment, you incredible buffoon. I also think it would be interesting to discuss the reasons for having the exclusionary rule in the first place, rather than simply stating it exists because of the bill of rights. Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 10:47 on Aug 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 10:15
|
|
|
Another big thing for 2018 is that the governor race here might be Dem vs Dem. That will probably depress Republican turnout further. 2018 is looking like a big opportunity here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 13:29
|
|
|
So this is where we end up when too many cop tv shows are burned into the American psyche.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 14:03
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:I'm shocked that posters in this thread are against the death penalty given that many posters periodically fantasize in this thread about the execution of Republicans and violent secession of California from the Union whenever their favorite politicians are not in power in the Federal government. he got us you guys
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 15:59
|
|
|
Skyscraper posted:fukken ZING To be fair, "say things I actually believe in such a way that I can fall back on 'it's just a joke you humorless idiot you're to stupid to get it' if called out or challenged" is a really annoying problem in D&D.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 17:48
|
|
|
The Wiggly Wizard posted:Executing republicans is unnecessary at this point. We're now about executing obstructionist centrist dems. FRINGE posted:Criminals deserve trials, and that should not end in an irreversible judgement of death. Lol Dead Reckoning posted:To be fair, "say things I actually believe in such a way that I can fall back on 'it's just a joke you humorless idiot you're to stupid to get it' if called out or challenged" is a really annoying problem in D&D. I don't think that it is an annoying problem, but it is amusing to me that many of these same posters probably whine about FYAD irony when it is applied to their sacred cows. Sometimes they even use irony when whining about it, further undermining their supposed principled stance against the societal dangers of ironic humor. silence_kit fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Aug 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Actually, this is what people were arguing. See above. If something has deterrent value, it is almost by definition a harm or penalty. Just because people are arguing that, doesn't make it actually the case, you inimitable moron. silence_kit posted:I don't think that it is an annoying problem, but it is amusing to me that many of these same posters probably whine about FYAD irony when it is applied to their sacred cows. Sometimes they even use irony when whining about it, further undermining their supposed principled stance against the societal dangers of ironic humor. It's cool how you only respond to people who aren't seriously engaging you. Makes you seem real worth debating.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:I don't think that it is an annoying problem, but it is amusing to me that many of these same posters probably whine about FYAD irony when it is applied to their sacred cows. Sometimes they even use irony when whining about it, further undermining their supposed principled stance against the societal dangers of ironic humor. oh no please don't slaughter my sacred cows silence_kit
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:Lol How dare I crack jokes about our most beloved and vulnerable class of people, the state legislature!
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:Just because people are arguing that, doesn't make it actually the case, you inimitable moron.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
The Wiggly Wizard posted:How dare I crack jokes about our most beloved and vulnerable class of people, the state legislature! I honestly thought your post was funny, hence the Lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
Some truth bombs being dropped ITT
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
will anyone escape unscathed
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:If you think the people I'm disagreeing with are wrong, I don't understand why you're yelling at me. You are making assertions about the actual reasoning behind the downgrade to life imprisonment that are not true. It doesn't matter what people are telling you. What you are saying is wrong.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:You are making assertions about the actual reasoning behind the downgrade to life imprisonment that are not true. It doesn't matter what people are telling you. What you are saying is wrong. I'm telling them that their reasoning is bad so again, IDK why you're getting mad at me. Follow up: If the purpose of the exclusionary isn't to punish/deter police misconduct like Trabisnikof said, what do you think its purpose is?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 02:16
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:The things I'm saying when I'm quoting other posters? I actually didn't say that was the purpose, only that within a pro-deterrent framework it would make sense to not allow unethical behavior to have no negative consequences. Hence my prefacing my statement with "if deterrance...."
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:The things I'm saying when I'm quoting other posters? Cup Runneth Over posted:Actually my fetish is for not imprisoning or executing innocent people, or violating criminal rights If the evidence is obtained improperly, it is invalid evidence. If the sentence is based on invalid evidence, it is thrown out. These are core concepts fundamental to the idea of due process. It's not a punishment, idiot. It's following the Constitution and rule of law.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 04:07
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I actually didn't say that was the purpose, only that within a pro-deterrent framework it would make sense to not allow unethical behavior to have no negative consequences. Hence my prefacing my statement with "if deterrance...." Cup Runneth Over posted:If the evidence is obtained improperly, it is invalid evidence. If the sentence is based on invalid evidence, it is thrown out. These are core concepts fundamental to the idea of due process. It's not a punishment, idiot. It's following the Constitution and rule of law. Evidence being improperly collected does not render it invalid. If a criminal does not dispute the truthfulness of the evidence of his guilt, but merely asserts that it was improperly obtained, why does allowing him to go free for lack of evidence better serve the interests of justice than admitting the evidence and professionally sanctioning the responsible law enforcement officer? Do you think the Supreme Court erred in deciding Utah v. Strieff and similar cases? Not all countries have an exclusionary rule. Do you think that its absence means that their citizens are not afforded due process and justice?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 04:44
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:If the evidence is obtained improperly, it is invalid evidence. If the sentence is based on invalid evidence, it is thrown out. These are core concepts fundamental to the idea of due process. It's not a punishment, idiot. It's following the Constitution and rule of law. Okay smart guy, if punishment isn't the fundamental cause of any and all events in the justice system, how come it's the only one I care about? And no using any of your fancy city-boy psychology either!
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:allowing him to go free for lack of evidence I can't believe how incredibly dishonest you're still being. There's no point having this argument with you when you just lie about all the facts. He's getting life in prison. Compared to that, putting him in a grave is letting him walk.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:I can't believe how incredibly dishonest you're still being. There's no point having this argument with you when you just lie about all the facts. He's getting life in prison. Compared to that, putting him in a grave is letting him walk. I was speaking in the abstract, the principle behind the thing, the why, not about any particular case. Can you answer the question now? How does suppressing true evidence serve the interests of justice?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
Come on guys let's not make this bigger than it is. All Dead Reckoning is saying is what if the Bill of Rights... is wrong?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 05:17 |
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Even if you're backpedaling to "well I was just saying that, if you believe in deterrence (which I don't)..." it still doesn't make sense as a deterrence measure. If it turns out that a firefighter was drunk on duty when he responded to a call, should we go back and burn down the building so that he thinks twice before doing it again? Why is it preferable to professionally sanctioning the responsible police/DAs? Perhaps in a perfect world where cops were unbiased in their illegal searches and were actually punished for anything, ever, short of murdering someone on camerAHAHAHA
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2017 05:12
|
|