Bitcoin Forum

http://www.infowars.com/cop-arrests-nbc-reporters-says-your-first-amendment-right-can-be-terminated/

I get a feeling that these "things" are accelerating in the last few months
how will this escalate, this is not sustainable situation...

Dude everyone has picked up on the vibe by now, this is the year everything will change.

LOL. Rights can't be terminated. They're not given.

Yes. This year will be interesting.

Great video! I've haven't a clue on how that police officer past any written test, let alone fill out an application on his own, to become a law enforcer. The son of a bitch even had a difficult time articulating a coherent sentence.

~Bruno~

If the President of the United States is POTUS and the Supreme Court of the United States is SCOTUS, then Congress In The United States is COITUS. No wonder they call it congress, because we're all getting screwed.

I'd pray for you Americans, but I don't believe in a deity.

Shit is gonna get ugly.

Well just for some context...

In Chicago, as soon as it gets warm out people start getting shot, every.single.year. Actually the first day it was (unseasonably) warm a week ago 16 people got shot.

Usually the police have a couple more months to plan for the warm weather. After decades of Daley's we just got a new mayor, Rahm Emmanual (Obama's former chief of staff). He has made it a point to mention whenever there are no shootings. His act is to be like a father figure talking to the children of Chicago. He gets on the news and says how proud he is if no one got shot one day. He got elected despite not actually living in Chicago for years, he owned a house here and was renting it out, then basically kicked out the renters and used that as proof of residency.

There is also an ongoing saga that there needs to be more police, but the city has no money for this so they are playing games with shifts and so on. On top of this, there is a whole thing going on because they keep tearing down the projects and arresting "ganglords" so now there are a bunch of decentralized sects fighting with each other... so some people associated with the fraternity of the police are playing this situation as sort of an unintended consequence due to this strategy that was declared from on high. There has been much talk of needing to "ruffle feathers".

This is a great source of info about chicago police and crime happenings.
http://secondcitycop.blogspot.com/

I have no opinion on the situation other than we should slowly legalize drugs. Too suddenly and shit will hit the fan. I've already paid my couple hundred in unreasonable tickets and fees this year so I've done my part. My point is that tensions are running high right now.

That said, apparently those reporters got caught trying to sneak into the hospital for some reason (official source)? But that cop didn't follow the rules. If the police don't follow the rules they can't expect anyone else to. In my experience chicago police are very reasonable compared to where I grew up.

I can easily think of five communities I've lived in where at least one local police officer was picked on when a kid. Later in life, they copped the how-do-you-like-me-now-you-son-of-a-bitch attitude.

~Bruno~

Ever listen to Stefan Molyneux? He's always talking about how sociopaths and criminals are almost always people with abusive childhoods. The government run prison school system doesn't help.

Like Georgie and Dim.

The idea that rights can be taken away were instilled into me by my public school.  We, the students, "signed" away our first and fourth amendment rights.  If we were to be outspoken about political topics, such as war or decriminalization, we were told to stop or be punished.  Many of my peers lived with this and believe that it is ok for their rights to be taken away if they are "bothering" other people and in many cases strictly state that. 

I wish people knew the reality of the situation, the governments are paranoid and will pursue removal of rights through ignorance to ease this paranoia. 

Although in the case of the article I believe it was more of a misunderstanding and ignorance. Which is also in very high levels in America.

ELT

The State cannot take away something it has only recognized. The State may grant you privileges (i.e. driving in their cars on their roads) but your Rights are yours by virtue of your Creation. The State can choose to not recognize your Rights, but that does not "take them away" - they are Rights. Failure to recognize your Rights violates them but does not remove them.

You say your right to assembly is yours by virtue of creation? Yeah, well, I am terminating it because Obama is 5 miles away. Now, I am going to peacefully put these handcuffs on you and take you downtown.

What's that? You decline?

http://arcanumdeepsecrets.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/police_dees.jpg

Rights are only yours when you have the might to protect them. Otherwise, you're like the guy above. Rights can be taken away even if you claim they are "inalienable".

Guess what? They just got alienated.

No, this guy is having his Rights violated. (for the sake of argument I'm presuming the kid innocent of any violence)

No amount of violence from the cop can take away that young kid's Rights. Just because someone can violate your Rights doesn't mean they can take them away. I know, you're thinking "fat lot of good it's doing that kid" - but if that act "took his Right away" you wouldn't care enough to post it, we would agree that it's the cop's Right to beat him. If that kid took the cop out, in self defense, he would be (IMO) justified because he'd have been "defending his Right" - the cop, on the other hand, by violating the kid's Right, has voluntarily waived his own Right to not be harmed.

One may not be able to protect those Rights when they're violated. This is when it's up to someone else to protect those Rights. You are doing this as you post the image above. It may be a small action, but all those add up.

In a similar situation, I have defended myself. It was my Right to not be harmed, and my Right to defend myself. No amount of pain could have convinced me that it was the officer's Right to harm me.

You may waive your own Rights, in some cases, but, IMO, if you have done so under duress or because of deception, you have not actually waived your Rights at all, they have instead been violated.

So you believe morality is objectively defined by 'inalienable rights'?

The two are certainly interrelated, but I'm not sure one defines the other. I am sure that it's immoral to violate someone's inalienable Rights. (but violation of those Rights may not be necessary to commit an immoral act)

I'll make it very simple: Who defines an inalienable right? What enforces an inalienable right?

A simple question with a complex answer. I would answer it, but do not believe you are educated enough to understand it. If the process was not included in your education, then I feel that the system has failed you. Since you seem to be interested in social issues, I suggest working on a liberal education at an accredited institution.

This is what progressives actually believe.

Finally, perhaps you are starting to understand.

Oy. How do I mute a post in here?  ::)