JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: newman on February 10, 2008, 03:17:08 AM
-
I think it should be encouraged in high crime spots. Whimpy, nice-guy, new-age cops achieve NOTHING. Old school head-kickers got the job done. O0
-
It should be eliminated. That doesn't mean that an officer can't or shouldn't "break down" an assailant who hits them first. It means that when a police officer pulls you over for speeding, he doesn't have the right to pull you through the window by your hair and kick you until you're unconcious.
-
Well, it depends if it's deserved. Certainly if a policeman or his fellow policeman is threatened with death, he should not hesitate to use deadly force, and he shouldn't be reprimanded for protecting himself and others. If anyone brings himself into a situation where he could be seen as endangering anyone's life, he should face the consequences from that regardless if he intended any actual threat.
Certainly police officers should use the amount of force necessary to detain a criminal and prevent him from being a harm to others, by all means necessary, regardless if it's seen as "brutality". I don't think police officers should use unnecessary or cruel force that doesn't suit some kind of purpose. (other than creating a deterrent for future criminals)
THere should certainly be laws passed to prevent public access to police videos. If a police officer has egregiously acted beyond reasonableness in inflicting harmful force against someone, and he is brought to trial, the video could be shown to the jury, but that should be it.
-
I'll tell you where police brutality is a good thing:
If you had a teenager gone off the rails...........truency at 14, petty theft at 15, drugs and gang activity at 16 and you just know at this rate the kid will be stabbed at 18 or shot at 20, wouldn't a good wallopping by the coppers be worth it if it scared them straight?
Broken bones, split lips and black eyes heal. Drog overdoses and lethal stabbings don't.
-
I'll tell you where police brutality is a good thing:
If you had a teenager gone off the rails...........truency at 14, petty theft at 15, drugs and gang activity at 16 and you just know at this rate the kid will be stabbed at 18 or shot at 20, wouldn't a good wallopping by the coppers be worth it if it scared them straight?
Broken bones, split lips and black eyes heal. Drog overdoses and lethal stabbings don't.
Well, for those kinds of criminals, I'm not sure if a beating would do anything to scare them straight. If they are involved in gang activity they probably have received their own share of beatings and close calls with death, so if the threat to their life in that context wouldn't scare them straight, I don't think a beating by a policeman would. Who knows, maybe if cops gave out beatings and these types of criminals were scared of them, they would do even more to evade police.
-
It should be eliminated, they are not above the law.
I respect some countries are different with social values, but I can't see the excessive use of force being a need, unless the crim is going to hurt the officer, then corrective measures are to be taken.
-
I'll tell you where police brutality is a good thing:
If you had a teenager gone off the rails...........truency at 14, petty theft at 15, drugs and gang activity at 16 and you just know at this rate the kid will be stabbed at 18 or shot at 20, wouldn't a good wallopping by the coppers be worth it if it scared them straight?
Broken bones, split lips and black eyes heal. Drog overdoses and lethal stabbings don't.
Well, for those kinds of criminals, I'm not sure if a beating would do anything to scare them straight. If they are involved in gang activity they probably have received their own share of beatings and close calls with death, so if the threat to their life in that context wouldn't scare them straight, I don't think a beating by a policeman would. Who knows, maybe if cops gave out beatings and these types of criminals were scared of them, they would do even more to evade police.
I'm talking about teenagers just getting involved with gangs, petty crime & drugs etc. I'm positive a severe beating that makes them mess their pants would scare them straight.
Secondly, one need only look at society over the last three generations. In the 50s, cops would regularly dish out beatings to wayward teens. Now the wayward teens are all jailhouse lawyers who know they can't be touched. Look at the difference between the western world of 1958 versus 2008. Which method do you think worked better?
-
I support More teacher's and parents "brutality" when the Police must theach respect it already too late. Fifty years ago police didn't have to be brutal to enforce good beghavour becouse the kids were raised properly, and few execive hard criminals or mobsters were kept inline by their own. And besides stormtroopers can be used by bolsheviks against us; in fact they were used against patriot hilltops youths and setlters in Israel.
But of course I voted 4th, as this is diferrent matter.
-
I'll tell you where police brutality is a good thing:
If you had a teenager gone off the rails...........truency at 14, petty theft at 15, drugs and gang activity at 16 and you just know at this rate the kid will be stabbed at 18 or shot at 20, wouldn't a good wallopping by the coppers be worth it if it scared them straight?
Broken bones, split lips and black eyes heal. Drog overdoses and lethal stabbings don't.
Well, for those kinds of criminals, I'm not sure if a beating would do anything to scare them straight. If they are involved in gang activity they probably have received their own share of beatings and close calls with death, so if the threat to their life in that context wouldn't scare them straight, I don't think a beating by a policeman would. Who knows, maybe if cops gave out beatings and these types of criminals were scared of them, they would do even more to evade police.
I'm talking about teenagers just getting involved with gangs, petty crime & drugs etc. I'm positive a severe beating that makes them mess their pants would scare them straight.
Secondly, one need only look at society over the last three generations. In the 50s, cops would regularly dish out beatings to wayward teens. Now the wayward teens are all jailhouse lawyers who know they can't be touched. Look at the difference between the western world of 1958 versus 2008. Which method do you think worked better?
Well, there are plenty of other explanations for the increase in crime since the 50s. For one, the third world population wasn't as high back then. Also, blacks hadn't fully gained civil rights. Now they have fully gained civil rights and then some, and despite that, they have failed to come to financial parity with the rest of America. Since they thought they would become equal with everyone else on every level quite shortly, and since their expectations didn't come to fruition, they have been relegated to the bottom of the social order, with little hope and increasing disparities of wealth, which is part of the reason why they commit so many crimes. Also the nature of gangs has become more extreme. They are more deadly, and there is more financial stake involved in gang activities which leads to more violence.
Police violence wasn't the main factor of less crime in the past, nor was it even a substantial factor.
-
I'm talking about teenagers just getting involved with gangs, petty crime & drugs etc. I'm positive a severe beating that makes them mess their pants would scare them straight.
Secondly, one need only look at society over the last three generations. In the 50s, cops would regularly dish out beatings to wayward teens. Now the wayward teens are all jailhouse lawyers who know they can't be touched. Look at the difference between the western world of 1958 versus 2008. Which method do you think worked better?
Well, there are plenty of other explanations for the increase in crime since the 50s. For one, the third world population wasn't as high back then. Also, blacks hadn't fully gained civil rights. Now they have fully gained civil rights and then some, and despite that, they have failed to come to financial parity with the rest of America. Since they thought they would become equal with everyone else on every level quite shortly, and since their expectations didn't come to fruition, they have been relegated to the bottom of the social order, with little hope and increasing disparities of wealth, which is part of the reason why they commit so many crimes. Also the nature of gangs has become more extreme. They are more deadly, and there is more financial stake involved in gang activities which leads to more violence.
Police violence wasn't the main factor of less crime in the past, nor was it even a substantial factor.
Poverty has ZERO to do with crime.
You've heard Chaim and others talk about NYC in the old days. The working class Jews, Polaks, Italians and Irish didn't have 2 cents to rub together but they could leave their homes unlocked. Even blacks in the old days had some decency. All DESPITE poverty.
BTW, show me 'poverty' in the west. Don't tell me that ANYBODY with $200 sneakers suffers from poverty.
What we see today is all part of a big picture. Years ago society demanded personal responsibility and punishment of wrong-doers. Police brutality was merely a tool. It worked. Today we have a victim culture and a mamby-pamby approach. It's a total failure.
I say turn the clock back and START with heavy-handed policing because it will have the greatest short term effect.
-
i say, beat the crap out of the law breakers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now where is my shambok!? But seriously, i find it typical for erica to want to see it eliminated ::)
-
A well trained and disciplined police officer could use a night stick on a disruptive person in a way that will stop them however leave no lasting injury. The problem is often the first instinct of an over zealous officer is to give someone a crack on the head with the stick sending them to the hospital. I think the police should be able to place a well placed bruise on a disruptive teen or even an adult that is causing a disturbance. In the past the night stick was a tool used to get people to disburse or stop what they were doing. It gave the officer a tool that allowed him not to use their hands or the gun. Years ago if a cop gave a kid a poke in the ribs or bruised up an arm because the kid was doing something wrong parents would often finish the job the cop started when the wayward kid or teen got home. Today parents hear the cash register bell ringing thinking about how much of a brutality case they can build. In the long run a little old fashion discipline is fine brutality on the other hand is not good for the police officer or the person they are dealing with.
-
It should be eliminated. That doesn't mean that an officer can't or shouldn't "break down" an assailant who hits them first. It means that when a police officer pulls you over for speeding, he doesn't have the right to pull you through the window by your hair and kick you until you're unconcious.
I agree O0
-
It should be eliminated. That doesn't mean that an officer can't or shouldn't "break down" an assailant who hits them first. It means that when a police officer pulls you over for speeding, he doesn't have the right to pull you through the window by your hair and kick you until you're unconcious.
I agree O0
Obviously, a police officer shouldn't be allowed to knock a person unconscious just for speeding. That entire concept is ridiculous and has nothing to do with newman's question. Officers shouldn't have to wait for a criminal to attack them or anyone else, a police officer should be able to proactively respond to anyone who is believed to be a threat.
-
It should be eliminated. That doesn't mean that an officer can't or shouldn't "break down" an assailant who hits them first. It means that when a police officer pulls you over for speeding, he doesn't have the right to pull you through the window by your hair and kick you until you're unconcious.
I agree O0
Obviously, a police officer shouldn't be allowed to knock a person unconscious just for speeding. That entire concept is ridiculous and has nothing to do with newman's question. Officers shouldn't have to wait for a criminal to attack them or anyone else, a police officer should be able to proactively respond to anyone who is believed to be a threat.
Indeed! Officers should not be scared to use lethal force if nescesary. But ofcourse, political policies should be in place, that would prevent crime in the first place. take away the un-rightoeus pro-criminlpolicies of today, and you simply don't have crime problems!
-
It should be eliminated. That doesn't mean that an officer can't or shouldn't "break down" an assailant who hits them first. It means that when a police officer pulls you over for speeding, he doesn't have the right to pull you through the window by your hair and kick you until you're unconcious.
I agree O0
Obviously, a police officer shouldn't be allowed to knock a person unconscious just for speeding. That entire concept is ridiculous and has nothing to do with newman's question. Officers shouldn't have to wait for a criminal to attack them or anyone else, a police officer should be able to proactively respond to anyone who is believed to be a threat.
Its not ridiculous I was married to a Cop (second Husband) and I know some that did, you also have some that have sexual favours. Franky nothing surprises me with them.
Of course that does not apply to the members of this forum that are Law Enforcement Officers. ^-^
-
Only when it is deserved or the person who is accused of a crime on the scene is at fault.
In many countries, and in the past, the police can beat and hurt a lot of innocent people.
-
Do you think women should be beaten?
Sometimes a harsh beating doesn't solve anything, it angers a person and pushes them in some cases to rebel and cause trouble further to get their own back.
These gang members probably get more of a beating from their own gangs and families, then they would do from police if they were allowed to hurt them. If the police can beat them up, they think it gives them the right to beat the police and everyone else up themselves.
-
It should be eliminated. That doesn't mean that an officer can't or shouldn't "break down" an assailant who hits them first. It means that when a police officer pulls you over for speeding, he doesn't have the right to pull you through the window by your hair and kick you until you're unconcious.
It depends on why they are being "brutal". I agree that it is wrong for a cop to smack any random person to oblivion. However, there are those who threaten cops, who are beligerent, who run away, who have weapons etc etc etc. The truth is the cop shoudl first subdue the person from causing a danger to himself and the cop. However, in case of squirmish in this situation, I beleive the cop has the right to protect himself and smack that person silly to subdue that person.
I belive that high crime areas have mostly these types of crazy criminals. Therefore, i woudl not eliminate it "brutality" all together. I would, on the other hand, hope that cops woudl be more brutal in these high crime areas basically to send a signal.
You can't be nice to bad guys. They all need to get their butts wooped.
It's only the nice guys who do petty things who surrender that shouldn't get their butts wooped. Let the courts deal with them properly.
-
I'll tell you where police brutality is a good thing:
If you had a teenager gone off the rails...........truency at 14, petty theft at 15, drugs and gang activity at 16 and you just know at this rate the kid will be stabbed at 18 or shot at 20, wouldn't a good wallopping by the coppers be worth it if it scared them straight?
The police should go after the bad guys instead of picking on some poor schlub with a burned-out taillight.
-
Well, there are plenty of other explanations for the increase in crime since the 50s. For one, the third world population wasn't as high back then. Also, blacks hadn't fully gained civil rights.
All the more reason for the big boys to create a police state. Its all part of one big scheme.
-
Well, there are plenty of other explanations for the increase in crime since the 50s. For one, the third world population wasn't as high back then. Also, blacks hadn't fully gained civil rights.
All the more reason for the big boys to create a police state. Its all part of one big scheme.
Yes you have right, to the point that people will beg the big brother to take control. :D
-
I think it should be encouraged in high crime spots. Whimpy, nice-guy, new-age cops achieve NOTHING. Old school head-kickers got the job done. O0
I get beaten up by these coppas on a daily basis. I may be white on the outside. But deep down inside, I'm really black. Ma skin is ma sin.
-
Do you think women should be beaten?
Sometimes a harsh beating doesn't solve anything, it angers a person and pushes them in some cases to rebel and cause trouble further to get their own back.
These gang members probably get more of a beating from their own gangs and families, then they would do from police if they were allowed to hurt them. If the police can beat them up, they think it gives them the right to beat the police and everyone else up themselves.
If it is a hoodlam or anyone who is about to kill the police man, definately. Otherwise, to me, women shoudl be treated differently until it is proven that they shoudln't be.
-
Do i want some redneck cop with a 90 IQ to have the right to beat me if he choses? No. Should a police officer be allowed to use force or fire his gun if he is being threatened? Yes.
Some peoples answers really surprise me... What if JTF had a protest. Would u think it's ok to get beat then??? How about if it was a Black cop who had a grudge against Jews? Be careful what u wish for.
-
Do i want some redneck cop with a 90 IQ to have the right to beat me if he choses? No. Should a police officer be allowed to use force or fire his gun if he is being threatened? Yes.
Some peoples answers really surprise me... What if JTF had a protest. Would u think it's ok to get beat then??? How about if it was a Black cop who had a grudge against Jews? Be careful what u wish for.
I said in high crime areas where the cop is being threatened and the one being arrested is being extremely disobedient
-
Police themselves can be criminals. Just because they wear a uniform doesn't give them any moral high ground. Therefore the public should keep a watch on the police.
-
Do i want some redneck cop with a 90 IQ to have the right to beat me if he choses? No. Should a police officer be allowed to use force or fire his gun if he is being threatened? Yes.
Some peoples answers really surprise me... What if JTF had a protest. Would u think it's ok to get beat then??? How about if it was a Black cop who had a grudge against Jews? Be careful what u wish for.
I said in high crime areas where the cop is being threatened and the one being arrested is being extremely disobedient
I never disagreed with you, i was just stating my opinion on the subject. I was surprised with the comments which reflected the sadistic "Yeaaaaaaaaa, beat the hell out of the criminals!" attitude but they don't surprise me. After all, people cheered when they used to feed people to lions in the Roman days.
I think its justifiable for them to use force when threatened weather its a high crime area or not, but using unecessary force ie. batoning/tasing/pepper spraying when u could control the situation otherwise is wrong. I fully understand there is people out there who don't understand anything except force though.
-
Police themselves can be criminals. Just because they wear a uniform doesn't give them any moral high ground. Therefore the public should keep a watch on the police.
I agree with this too. Naturally, that job is going to attract many "power hungry" individuals. Giving them power is necessary for their job, but they need to be monitored and regulated more.
-
Police themselves can be criminals. Just because they wear a uniform doesn't give them any moral high ground. Therefore the public should keep a watch on the police.
I agree with this too. Naturally, that job is going to attract many "power hungry" individuals. Giving them power is necessary for their job, but they need to be monitored and regulated more.
The majority of serial killers of the power/control variety (there are 4 types of serial killers) expressed an interest in law enforcement and the military, and other positions of authority. Police are not special people. They should not be able to unilaterally use that kind of force. It should take a collective decision.
-
I'm all in favor of brutalizing the Police all we want ;)
-
It should be eliminated. That doesn't mean that an officer can't or shouldn't "break down" an assailant who hits them first. It means that when a police officer pulls you over for speeding, he doesn't have the right to pull you through the window by your hair and kick you until you're unconcious.
Oh, come now! I think it's perfectly okay for the Police to deliver as many DWBs as they see fit! Pulling you through the window and delivering a Rodney King special is perfectly reasonable!
-
I'll tell you where police brutality is a good thing:
If you had a teenager gone off the rails...........truency at 14, petty theft at 15, drugs and gang activity at 16 and you just know at this rate the kid will be stabbed at 18 or shot at 20, wouldn't a good wallopping by the coppers be worth it if it scared them straight?
Broken bones, split lips and black eyes heal. Drog overdoses and lethal stabbings don't.
I'd say beat them at 14...
-
I think if police brutality is used, it should have to be public. Hiding it should be illegal. I am not sympathetic to any right to privacy involving brutality. I also think that if possible, the police should collectively make the decision rather than just one guy doing it.
-
Do i want some redneck cop with a 90 IQ to have the right to beat me if he choses? No. Should a police officer be allowed to use force or fire his gun if he is being threatened? Yes.
Some peoples answers really surprise me... What if JTF had a protest. Would u think it's ok to get beat then??? How about if it was a Black cop who had a grudge against Jews? Be careful what u wish for.
I said in high crime areas where the cop is being threatened and the one being arrested is being extremely disobedient
I never disagreed with you, i was just stating my opinion on the subject. I was surprised with the comments which reflected the sadistic "Yeaaaaaaaaa, beat the hell out of the criminals!" attitude but they don't surprise me. After all, people cheered when they used to feed people to lions in the Roman days.
I think its justifiable for them to use force when threatened weather its a high crime area or not, but using unecessary force ie. batoning/tasing/pepper spraying when u could control the situation otherwise is wrong. I fully understand there is people out there who don't understand anything except force though.
Precisely, I agree with this.
-
I'll tell you where police brutality is a good thing:
If you had a teenager gone off the rails...........truency at 14, petty theft at 15, drugs and gang activity at 16 and you just know at this rate the kid will be stabbed at 18 or shot at 20, wouldn't a good wallopping by the coppers be worth it if it scared them straight?
Broken bones, split lips and black eyes heal. Drog overdoses and lethal stabbings don't.
I'd say beat them at 14...
What a brutal comment to make. I remember a time in the not-so-distant-past where just for sport, (or to make an example..) innocent people were flogged in public, killed in public. I don't see that behavior any different than when terrorists kidnap media figures, military members, or civilian aid workers and put them on display for all to see them become victims of public decapitations. All to prove a point.
Physically punish those who throw the first punch... don't get into a power [censored] contest to test your brute strength (absent of mind) by beating someone half- to death to prove a point. You'd hate it if you were one of those victims. (Rodney King asked for that beatdown...)
-
I remember a time in the not-so-distant-past where just for sport, (or to make an example..) innocent people were flogged in public, killed in public. I don't see that behavior any different than when terrorists kidnap media figures, military members, or civilian aid workers and put them on display for all to see them become victims of public decapitations.
[/quote]
If you can't tell the moral difference between criminals being publicly executed or flogged by authorities and innocent people being kidnapped by terrorists, you're as morally vaccuous as all the other blacks.
-
I remember a time in the not-so-distant-past where just for sport, (or to make an example..) innocent people were flogged in public, killed in public. I don't see that behavior any different than when terrorists kidnap media figures, military members, or civilian aid workers and put them on display for all to see them become victims of public decapitations.
If you can't tell the moral difference between criminals being publicly executed or flogged by authorities and innocent people being kidnapped by terrorists, you're as morally vaccuous as all the other blacks.
[/quote]
Like all liberals; not all blacks Thank G-d are like her. ;)
-
I remember a time in the not-so-distant-past where just for sport, (or to make an example..) innocent people were flogged in public, killed in public. I don't see that behavior any different than when terrorists kidnap media figures, military members, or civilian aid workers and put them on display for all to see them become victims of public decapitations.
If you can't tell the moral difference between criminals being publicly executed or flogged by authorities and innocent people being kidnapped by terrorists, you're as morally vaccuous as all the other blacks.
[/quote]I think police officers who abuse their authority are just as bad as terrorists.
-
I think police brutality should be encouraged on blacks, muslims and anyone else who is an anti-semite.
-
I think police brutality should be encouraged on blacks, muslims and anyone else who is an anti-semite.
See? I didn't read it wrong. You didn't specify whether evil blacks should be beaten by police but that blacks, muslim and anyone who is an anti-semite. That's terrible.
-
police are brutal on the wrong people, be brutal to the brutal, merciful to the merciful. Beat the s*** out of the gang banger, treat the person who got a speeding ticket with more mercy
-
police are brutal on the wrong people, be brutal to the brutal, merciful to the merciful. Beat the s*** out of the gang banger, treat the person who got a speeding ticket with more mercy
Beat the **** out of the gangbanger who resists arrest, grabs at your pistol, (shoot him at that point) ...to the gangbanger who doesn't resist arrest, treat him like anyone else you'd take in. Don't beat them down because you're angry with the life they chose...you can't save them...but you can get them off of the streets and prevent them from hurting others.
-
There should be more of it in high crime gangster areas where people are afraid to call the cops because of the violent gang activity, these monsters also must be wiped out.
-
I think police brutality should be encouraged on blacks, muslims and anyone else who is an anti-semite.
See? I didn't read it wrong. You didn't specify whether evil blacks should be beaten by police but that blacks, muslim and anyone who is an anti-semite. That's terrible.
I think they should use police brutality against all black people. You simply cannot afford to take any chances. We can make an exception for Beyonce though.
-
I think police brutality should be encouraged on blacks, muslims and anyone else who is an anti-semite.
See? I didn't read it wrong. You didn't specify whether evil blacks should be beaten by police but that blacks, muslim and anyone who is an anti-semite. That's terrible.
I think they should use police brutality against all black people. You simply cannot afford to take any chances. We can make an exception for Beyonce though.
Great, just great.
-
I think police brutality should be encouraged on blacks, muslims and anyone else who is an anti-semite.
See? I didn't read it wrong. You didn't specify whether evil blacks should be beaten by police but that blacks, muslim and anyone who is an anti-semite. That's terrible.
I think they should use police brutality against all black people. You simply cannot afford to take any chances. We can make an exception for Beyonce though.
Great, just great.
Glad you agree home girl 8;)
-
I think police brutality should be encouraged on blacks, muslims and anyone else who is an anti-semite.
See? I didn't read it wrong. You didn't specify whether evil blacks should be beaten by police but that blacks, muslim and anyone who is an anti-semite. That's terrible.
I think they should use police brutality against all black people. You simply cannot afford to take any chances. We can make an exception for Beyonce though.
Great, just great.
Glad you agree home girl 8;)
Don't misunderstand me, I dont' agree with you and I'm not your homegirl; especially after you just said that police should beat ME; i.e."ALL BLACK PEOPLE". If I'd said some derranged crap like that...where white people are the brutality victims...I'd have been banned.
-
Nobody said the coppers should beat you, Erica. You're a nice, middle class, white kind of black with a minivan............like Thelma when she married that well to do guy.
We're saying they should beat up the ghetto criminals.
-
Rodney King asked for that beatdown.
I'm amazed to hear you say that, Erica.
Good for you.
-
Rodney King asked for that beatdown.
I'm amazed to hear you say that, Erica.
Good for you.
Why, I've said it many times before...I've also said that OJ did it... welfare needs a change...AA needs to be taken away...Al Sharpton is no one's leader... Jesse Jackson is a joke... but all you guys can see is that I'm black therefore I must be supporting ALL BLACKS, even the evil ones.
And you don't have to congratulate me on something I've always believed. I don't need a pat on the head because I think with common sense.
-
Nobody said the coppers should beat you, Erica. You're a nice, middle class, white kind of black with a minivan............like Thelma when she married that well to do guy.
We're saying they should beat up the ghetto criminals.
NO , Newman... Merkava said that All Blacks should be beaten by the police. That includes me.And dont' compare me to fictional characters, man. These racial stereotypes of how I act and what I drive and who I married is getting really old, really fast. Why dont' you go out and meet REAL blacks. You dont' know how Bern'nadette Stanis and the rest of the actors and actresses of Good Times really are in REAL LIFE.
-
I think police brutality should be encouraged on blacks, muslims and anyone else who is an anti-semite.
See? I didn't read it wrong. You didn't specify whether evil blacks should be beaten by police but that blacks, muslim and anyone who is an anti-semite. That's terrible.
I think they should use police brutality against all black people. You simply cannot afford to take any chances. We can make an exception for Beyonce though.
They should use police brutality on you Merkava until you come to your senses.
-
wow, i'd like to see what some of these ppl would say if their child got "disciplined" by a white nazi cop.. all men are created equal..
-
Let's stop insulting forum members.
JR-Obilic, all men are not created equal. Some people are born intelligent while others are born mentally handicapped. Some people are born into a rich family, some are born into poor families. Some are born into islam, some people are born Jews. That's a line from the liberals who depend on extreme idealism and wishful thinking.
-
By equal i'm not saying everyone has the same physical attributes or the same social status. But that you should treat others the way you want to be treated, and the way u want others to treat your family. When you say someone should be prosecuted because of their skin color, that's kind of the opposite of that. If someone somehow feels superior, i hope they do some great things, there's no need to put other people down. Being born a Serb or a Jew doesn't automatically make you good. But i can tell you for sure that a lot of people have overcome shortcomings to do things greater then many people who have it all and chose to do nothing.
The opening of the Declaration of Independence written by Thomas Jefferson in 1776, states as follows:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."
-
I think police brutality should be encouraged on blacks, muslims and anyone else who is an anti-semite.
See? I didn't read it wrong. You didn't specify whether evil blacks should be beaten by police but that blacks, muslim and anyone who is an anti-semite. That's terrible.
I think they should use police brutality against all black people. You simply cannot afford to take any chances. We can make an exception for Beyonce though.
They should use police brutality on you Merkava until you come to your senses.
You are saying that because I'm black >:( You are racist !
-
I think police brutality should be encouraged on blacks, muslims and anyone else who is an anti-semite.
See? I didn't read it wrong. You didn't specify whether evil blacks should be beaten by police but that blacks, muslim and anyone who is an anti-semite. That's terrible.
I think they should use police brutality against all black people. You simply cannot afford to take any chances. We can make an exception for Beyonce though.
They should use police brutality on you Merkava until you come to your senses.
You are saying that because I'm black >:( You are racist !
You're as black as you are a woman. I don't mean it, you just shouldn't say police brutality should be used against all black people.
-
I don't mean it, you just shouldn't say police brutality should be used against all black people.
No....READ MY POST AGAIN. Police brutality should be used against all black people EXCEPT for Beyonce.
-
I don't mean it, you just shouldn't say police brutality should be used against all black people.
No....READ MY POST AGAIN. Police brutality should be used against all black people EXCEPT for Beyonce.
She isn't 100% black, her parents were mixed race.
-
I think police brutality should be encouraged on blacks, muslims and anyone else who is an anti-semite.
See? I didn't read it wrong. You didn't specify whether evil blacks should be beaten by police but that blacks, muslim and anyone who is an anti-semite. That's terrible.
I think they should use police brutality against all black people. You simply cannot afford to take any chances. We can make an exception for Beyonce though.
They should use police brutality on you Merkava until you come to your senses.
You are saying that because I'm black >:( You are racist !
If you were black you would have said, "You IS a racist."; Not "You ARE a racist." Come on! Where's your brotha'hood? :::D
-
If you were black you would have said, "You IS a racist."; Not "You ARE a racist." Come on! Where's your brotha'hood? rotflmao!
I'm a self hating black man but I use this soap daily :
(http://www.buysell.ph/adpics/46d24d36d45730dfe5d107135.jpg)
maybe one day I'll be as white as you. ^-^
-
If you were black you would have said, "You IS a racist."; Not "You ARE a racist." Come on! Where's your brotha'hood? rotflmao!
I'm a self hating black man but I use this soap daily :
(http://www.buysell.ph/adpics/46d24d36d45730dfe5d107135.jpg)
maybe one day I'll be as white as you. ^-^
OH MY you are MICHAEL JACKSON
(http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/24500/Chinese-Michael-Jackson--24836.jpg)
:o :o :o :o
-
If you were black you would have said, "You IS a racist."; Not "You ARE a racist." Come on! Where's your brotha'hood? rotflmao!
I'm a self hating black man but I use this soap daily :
(http://www.buysell.ph/adpics/46d24d36d45730dfe5d107135.jpg)
maybe one day I'll be as white as you. ^-^
OH MY you are MICHAEL JACKSON
(http://www.freakingnews.com/pictures/24500/Chinese-Michael-Jackson--24836.jpg)
:o :o :o :o
Shamone 8;).