America - The Official Thread

[killerjimbag]

Certainly, but when you're talking about making law that's naturally going to apply to any similar protests or events in the future. That's not specific any more.

So when you write things like "You don't see Republicans or Trump supporters covering their faces, unless they are trying defend themselves from the physical attacks by the radical left loons", that comes off as pretty biased. The purpose of banning masks would be to curtail all people inappropriately protesting, regardless of their political affiliation or lack thereof. In your opinion, a ban on masks at protests would be a targeted ban, which is wholly against the idea of equality that America tends to hold in fairly high regard.

If you'd like to say that you'd support a ban on masks regardless of whether the protesters were Democrat or Republican, then say that.



I doubt anyone would want a sharp flagpole or pepper spray if things escalate. The police have batons and pepper spray too.



That's defense against riot sprays. They most affect the eyes, so covering and sealing them well can help. Admittedly, he's not doing it very well and he's still going to get messed up if he gets hit in the face, but that's the idea behind it at least.



And you accuse others of being violent? Hah!

Never did I say I was violent. If someone wants to violate my or potentially violate my property or family,hell yeah,they would suffer the consequences of their stupidity.So pepper spraying a woman and her children who are Trump supporters is what? An act of cowardice.
https://www.google.ca/amp/amp.daily...epper-sprays-hispanic-children-in-california/

 

[TenEightyOne]

Never did I say I was violent. If someone wants to violate my or potentially violate my property or family,hell yeah,they would suffer the consequences of their stupidity.So pepper spraying a woman and her children who are Trump supporters is what? An act of cowardice.
https://www.google.ca/amp/amp.daily...epper-sprays-hispanic-children-in-california/

Oddly they seemed alright immediately afterwards, at least in the video. Not that it makes his actions right or, for that matter, representative.

Your source is a funny one though, hard not to respect any site that uses a headline like "Lib Twitter ***** its Pants". A keeper fo' sho'.

 

[Com Fox]

Yes, speaking anonymously in a YouTube video is exactly the same as wearing a mask and smashing a Starbucks. Oh, wait, Perhaps you were just being sarcastic.

The reasons WHY they do it, is exactly the same though.

When I started this mess three pages ago, I was referring specifically to the videos posted by @RESHIRAM5 in this post. I was not talking about the lawn guy, or the someone riding a motorcycle. I was speaking about those showing up to "protests" with their faces covered.

Yes because I totally posted the videos focusing on the well issue of people covering their faces NOT about people commiting the crimes.

 

[Dotini]

Rachel Maddow: "In 2005 Trump paid $38,000,000 in taxes. How terrible, horrible, awful! Russia, Russia, Russia! [rends clothing, beats breast, sets hair on fire] Trump paid $38,000,000 in taxes. Terrible, horrible, awful! Russia , Russia, Russia!"

 

[Scaff]

Rachel Maddow: "In 2005 Trump paid $38,000,000 in taxes. How terrible, horrible, awful! Russia, Russia, Russia! [rends clothing, beats breast, sets hair on fire] Trump paid $38,000,000 in taxes. Terrible, horrible, awful! Russia , Russia, Russia!"

The single most interesting thing about it, is that is marked Client Copy.

Does that not make it his own copy rather than one leaked from the IRS?

@Dotini does this not get your conspiracy theory juices running riot?

 

[fatkrakr]

In your opinion, a ban on masks at protests would be a targeted ban, which is wholly against the idea of equality that America tends to hold in fairly high regard.

If you'd like to say that you'd support a ban on masks regardless of whether the protesters were Democrat or Republican, then say that.

Ah there it is. You making **** up again to suit your agenda. No where did he or any one else say except Trump supporters or except so and so supporters. Yet here you are completely fabricating facts to support your BS. I do find it funny how you get upset when some puts words in your mouth yet thats the sole basis of all your interactions.

 

[ryzno]

The single most interesting thing about it, is that is marked Client Copy.

Does that not make it his own copy rather than one leaked from the IRS?

@Dotini does this not get your conspiracy theory juices running riot?

Well he did release it to get an upper hand on the leak. Probably is his.

 

[Scaff]

Well he did release it to get an upper hand on the leak. Probably is his.

The White House only confirmed the numbers that I am aware of. This is the document that was provided to the press by an anonymous source that kicked the whole thing off.

 

[Dotini]

@Dotini does this not get your conspiracy theory juices running riot?

It's true, I'm an aficionado of mysteries and anomalies - a fun hobby for retirees. I grew up in the '50's in the desert southwest when UFOs were widely seen and reported upon. As a boy, I read Sherlock Holmes and suffered the JFK assassination as any patriotic 14 year old might. With Watergate and the Nixon resignation, Gulf of Tonkin and Vietnam and 9/11 and Iraq, it was easy to begin to see history as well as nature to be filled with mystery, anomaly, problems and inconsistencies enough to inspire the attentions of any Sherlock Holmes, Jr.

 

[ryzno]

http://www.tmz.com/2017/03/14/donald-trump-tax-records/

The president released the financial info under pressure from MSNBC's Rachel Maddow ... who promised to broadcast the 2005 data on her show Tuesday evening. Half an hour before she went to air the White House revealed Trump paid the $38 mil on $150 million income.

I guess you're right.

 

[Imari]

Ah there it is. You making **** up again to suit your agenda. No where did he or any one else say except Trump supporters or except so and so supporters.

Careful, now.

You don't see Republicans or Trump supporters covering their faces, unless they are trying defend themselves from the physical attacks by the radical left loons.

So in which case they'd hardly be affected by a mask ban, yet the radical left loons would be stopped in their tracks. That's the meaning I took from that. I could be wrong, and I'm happy to hear your correction.

Yet here you are completely fabricating facts to support your BS. I do find it funny how you get upset when some puts words in your mouth yet thats the sole basis of all your interactions.

If you say so. He said that Trump supporters and Republicans only wear masks for defense. That seems pretty clear to me. I was just pointing out the obvious follow-up that if so then it would be essentially a targeted ban.

I don't actually think that he or I believe that is how it would work though. Which I why I asked if he'd like to amend what he said. Everyone wears masks, for various reasons, and so actually such a ban wouldn't be targeted at all. But it's worth being careful as to what one says, and to avoid unnecessarily creating "good" and "evil" sides. Especially when those are political groups, and the reality is that there are nice and completely rational people on both sides. And raging lunatics, who may or may not be deterred from their crimes by having restrictions on masks, and would still be criminals and raging lunatics completely regardless of their political affiliations.

Criminals should be caught and punished, and I don't think many people here disagree with that. I don't think creating a law against masks fulfills any purpose that the current laws against crimes don't already. Chrunch does, but I don't think it's particularly useful to turn that into a Democrats vs. Republicans thing, because it just turns into a poo flinging contest. There are groups on both sides that have done pretty awful things, both recently and in the past, and so trying to paint one as righteous is just a waste of time regardless of your affiliation.

Never did I say I was violent.

Yes, apart from the violent things that you will do to anyone who unlawfully enters your property or messes with your family.

You're practically a pacifist, you're so adamant about your non-violence. I mean, even your forum name just shouts non-violence to anyone who might read it. KillerJimbag, the gentlest guy north of Trump's wall.

So pepper spraying a woman and her children who are Trump supporters is what? An act of cowardice.
https://www.google.ca/amp/amp.daily...epper-sprays-hispanic-children-in-california/

It's a crime.

It's actually funny how many adjectives you can take out of that and still have it be a crime. It doesn't matter that it was a woman and her children. It doesn't matter that they were Trump supporters. It doesn't matter that it was an anti-Trump demonstrator doing it. It doesn't matter that the victims were Hispanic and it's barely relevant that it was in California only for the sake of deciding how hard to throw the book at them.

A person pepper sprayed some other people without any reasonable justification at all. That is a crime. Just like punching someone in the face, or running them over with your car.

Do you expect me to defend this behaviour? They should be locked up. Or at least given whatever is the appropriate sentence for the crime, if that's not jail time. Me, I'd certainly be in favour of some gaol time for that.

 

[Danoff]

It is funny I don't hear anything on the news about Salt Lake City having riots for days on end. But hey, if you are attending them wearing a mask, then yes, I think you should arrested.

For attending a riot or attending a protest?

If you're saying he should be arrested for attending a protest while wearing a mask due to pollution or weather... you've lost touch with your own argument.

 

[fatkrakr]

So in which case they'd hardly be affected by a mask ban, yet the radical left loons would be stopped in their tracks. That's the meaning I took from that. I could be wrong, and I'm happy to hear your correction.
Exactly my point, you completely fabricated the part about only stopping certain people from wearing masks to protests.
If you say so. He said that Trump supporters and Republicans only wear masks for defense. That seems pretty clear to me. I was just pointing out the obvious follow-up that if so then it would be essentially a targeted ban.

How does him saying "wear for defense" equal a targeted ban? Your twisting his words for your agenda.


Edit: Before this gets started yes I believe all protesters should not wear masks regardless of your position on said protest.

 

[Tornado]

No he didn't. He gave a fairly extensive breakdown of why he responded to Chrunch the way he did and why he was waiting for Chrunch (and not fatrakr, notably) to clarify. If you had actually read it instead of jumping on the first sentence you found that you thought supported your point in a conversation that wasn't even directed at you, you would have known that.

 

[killerjimbag]

Yes, apart from the violent things that you will do to anyone who unlawfully enters your property or messes with your family.

You're practically a pacifist, you're so adamant about your non-violence. I mean, even your forum name just shouts non-violence to anyone who might read it. KillerJimbag, the gentlest guy north of Trump's wall.

Ha,ha, what would you do,pepper spray them, throw masks at them, or poke them with a stick?
Or turtle, let them rob your house and wait for the police to come?

Usually, people that enter your property "unlawfully" don't have intentions of petting my dogs, playing on the swing with my granddaughter,or taking pictures of my flower gardens,fireplace, grass, cars, and piles of snow! That's why I have an 8' fence around it. To keep unlawfull people out,security for my family,to keep my granddaughter in and to keep the dog's in, which is the "law",so they can't go running around.

I am non violent,that's why I have 2 dogs,they would probably take care of the problem first,scare away any sensible person,and deter them from going to my neighbors houses,which are also fenced.See were this is going now.
So it would probably be a great idea to drop everything else you have in your hands and go back were you came from.If someone is stupid enough to go past a bunch of barking, big ass,growling,dogs,well then other consequences will follow. Would you jump a fence with 220 lbs of dogs just waiting for you? Or enter a house,unlawfully?
We have a right to protect our self/family and hard earned belongings,from unlawfull people,the ones that wear masks,face coverings,or not,that usually have intentions of committing a crime or crimes.

As for my forum name,LOL, that has to do with COD World at War back in the day,it has nothing to do with being a violent person, unless video game names mean your violent.

Hey,what the hell is gaol time?

 

[DDastardly00]

Question: What's worse than a George Soros organization funding protests, sometimes violent protests in other countries?

Answer: Your tax dollars paying for it.

Lovely isn't it?

This is interesting (in an appalling way of course):

US House Representative Trent Franks (R-AZ) has condemned the decision by the US Embassy in Macedonia to enter a strategic partnership with the George Soros led Foundation Open Society. In an interview with the Macedonian Television, Franks has not minced words about the activities of the US Embassy, saying that its actions are a significant cause for concern and will lead to investigations by the Inspector General as well as the Government Accountability Office.

Can't wait for the GAO's findings on this. This is one of those things where you drop the 5 megaton Hammer down.... and hard too.

Our tax dollars are funding 'activists' (or thugs if you prefer) in other countries when we are doing a shoddy job of taking care of our mentally ill, our homeless-displaced persons, our returning veterans and so on. This is honestly the stupidest thing I've read this week, which is saying something because I've read some real zingers lately.

 

[killerjimbag]

Oddly they seemed alright immediately afterwards, at least in the video. Not that it makes his actions right or, for that matter, representative.

Your source is a funny one though, hard not to respect any site that uses a headline like "Lib Twitter ***** its Pants". A keeper fo' sho'.

Here lets clear that up a bit,from the Orange County Register,they seem pretty respectable,look at the pictures in the link also. Actually no one is wearing masks or balaclavas,including the police. But someone seems intent on spraying a grandmother,her grandchildren,an old man. Yeah that's just incredible.
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/trump-713651-great-donald.html

 

[Sanji Himura]

http://www.tmz.com/2017/03/14/donald-trump-tax-records/



I guess you're right.

Meanwhile, Socialist Bernie Sanders paid in the 13% bracket according to his 2014 returns:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...te-socialist-bernie-sanders-paid-13-tax-rate/

(Video in link)

 

[TenEightyOne]

Here lets clear that up a bit,from the Orange County Register,they seem pretty respectable,look at the pictures in the link also. Actually no one is wearing masks or balaclavas,including the police. But someone seems intent on spraying a grandmother,her grandchildren,an old man. Yeah that's just incredible.

No video in there, that's just still... not sure what your point is. You're not condoning the use of pepper spray are you?

 

[killerjimbag]

No video in there, that's just still... not sure what your point is. You're not condoning the use of pepper spray are you?

This link below seems a little more respectable as per this,

your source is a funny one though, hard not to respect any site that uses a headline like "Lib Twitter ***** its Pants". A keeper fo' sho'.

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/trump-713651-great-donald.html
Never said video,here I'll clear that up for you "look at the pictures in the link" click "view slideshow".

If you missed these parts also,it's kind of self explanatory,looking at said pictures

More than 50 Trump supporters and opponents – about two dozen on each side – clashed. Five people were pepper-sprayed – three were treated at the scene, two didn’t require treatment, Anaheim police Sgt. Daron Wyatt said.

No one was taken into custody during the altercation, but police were working to find the sprayer, he said.

At least two of those sprayed were female Trump supporters and two were children, ages 8 and 11.

A woman wearing a red “Make America Great Again” cap was hit on the left side of her face with the spray. Both of her grandchildren were also hit.

Paramedics were seen pouring water into the victims’ eyes to try to remove the stinging spray. The 8-year-old cried hysterically.

Pressing a white ice pack to the right side of her face, Linda Reedy of Laguna Niguel said she was also hit with pepper spray.

“All I remember is a young man jumped on one of my friends and I told him to get off. Then I got pepper-sprayed,” said Reedy, 53, wearing a U.S.A. shirt and cap.

Raul Rodriguez, 74, of Upland, was one of the Trump supporters who was pepper sprayed by a protester. After flushing out the pepper spray, he said he felt okay.



No I clearly don't condone the use of pepper spray on anyone,especially women and children and senior citizens!
Unless it is used in the act of self defense,or to deter violence or rioting. Clearly from the pictures in the provided link and reporters comments,they Mrs.Ready and Mr Raul Rodriguez were not engaging in any violence or illegal activities,nor were the 2 children.
Does that clear things up for you?

Here is some pictures for you,does this look like a bunch of senior citizens engaging in violence or trying to stop it?
Police were working to find the sprayer, he said.I guess the picture of the alleged perpetrator,wasn't good enough.




Old guy getting sprayed,by a protester without a mask,wow.

Again,look at the seniors causing a disturbance.

and Again

 

[Danoff]

@killerjimbag

A few remarks about an aside to the main conversation gets just a deluge of proof including time lapse photography. If only we could get this level of attention brought to the topic that was really being debated. The fact that this guy, while not wearing a mask, was attacking people in the crowd seems to actually support the notion that masks are irrelevant.

 

[killerjimbag]

@killerjimbag

A few remarks about an aside to the main conversation gets just a deluge of proof including time lapse photography. If only we could get this level of attention brought to the topic that was really being debated. The fact that this guy, while not wearing a mask, was attacking people in the crowd seems to actually support the notion that masks are irrelevant.

Yeah masked people are usually intent on not causing trouble.
Yes they are evidently,how many more pics do you want of masked protesters,being non violent?I guess they carry around hammers to do carpentry later,and bats to play baseball in the dark?

I guess perhaps drinks later at your house?Sure, lets go back to Starbucks and grab some more coffee!

 

[Northstar]

Yeah masked people are usually intent on not causing trouble.
Yes they are evidently,how many more pics do you want of masked protesters,being non violent?I guess they carry around hammers to do carpentry later,and bats to play baseball in the dark?

I guess perhaps drinks later at your house?Sure, lets go back to Starbucks and grab some more coffee!

Do you really believe none of those incidents would have occurred if masks weren't allowed? Or that any of those criminals give a rats ass about whether masks are legal or not?

 

[McLaren]

Do you really believe none of those incidents would have occurred if masks weren't allowed? Or that any of those criminals give a rats ass about whether masks are legal or not?

To prove your point even more, last picture. Dude resorted to using his hoodie when he realized his face could be seen.

 

[Joey D]

Yeah masked people are usually intent on not causing trouble.
Yes they are evidently,how many more pics do you want of masked protesters,being non violent?I guess they carry around hammers to do carpentry later,and bats to play baseball in the dark?

These guys are just down right savage with destroying property! I mean look at how non-peaceful and rowdy they're being. Oh wait, that's not right. Truth is the only things these guys are guilty of is being too nice of a guy and not being able to steal your girlfriend. Also, guilty of posting dank memes on r/atheism, saying M'Lady, wearing a fedora outside 1960, and having a neck beard.

Also, there were several protests in SLC regarding the pollution and this is exactly how most people showed up.

I can see the capitol from my office and I walk past the capitol on my way home at night, I can assure you these masked people were peaceful, respectful, and just wanted something to be done about the toxic cesspool we live in.

 

[killerjimbag]

Do you really believe none of those incidents would have occurred if masks weren't allowed? Or that any of those criminals give a rats ass about whether masks are legal or not?

What? Yes,police departments, have those things called face recognition? Do thieves wear gloves,ah,yeah,its called finger prints. You know when you get arrested,they take a little picture of you and your finger prints,so they can recognize your face or match your prints!Evidently they give a rats ass,or they wouldn't be wearing them now would they?

These guys are just down right savage with destroying property! I mean look at how non-peaceful and rowdy they're being. Oh wait, that's not right. Truth is the only things these guys are guilty of is being too nice of a guy and not being able to steal your girlfriend. Also, guilty of posting dank memes on r/atheism, saying M'Lady, wearing a fedora outside 1960, and having a neck beard.

Ah boy,one is so smart,he's got it on backwards.Legalize freedom,what it's against the law to be free?
Well,they probably have to go back to hacking,or looking at how to steal a girl,while wearing a fedora and playing angry birds with my iPad.

The funny thing is,the dummies didn't even give the kid a mask,Really?
Yes it's a dirty planet,but screw the kid,actually 2 kids,ha,ha,they can fend for themself.
Your going to have to do better than that,or I'm going to piss my self laughing.

 

[Northstar]

What? Yes,police departments, have those things called face recognition? Do thieves wear gloves,ah,yeah,its called finger prints. You know when you get arrested,they take a little picture of you and your finger prints,so they can recognize your face or match your prints!Evidently they give a rats ass,or they wouldn't be wearing them now would they?

I never said there wasn't a reason for wearing a mask, just that criminals couldn't give a damn about their legality (which they don't, because their criminals).

Now, please answer my first question.

Do you really believe none of those incidents would have occurred if masks weren't allowed?

 

[TRGTspecialist]

I like how despite dedicating an entire post to showing us photos of masked people being violent - which proves almost sod all, by the way - somehow, this photo slipped in which shows us a group of people committing the incredibly violent act of walking.

 

[killerjimbag]

I never said there wasn't a reason for wearing a mask, just that criminals couldn't give a damn about their legality (which they don't, because their criminals).

Now, please answer my first question.

I already answered your first question,"Police have face recognition"


I like how despite dedicating an entire post to showing us photos of masked people being violent - which proves almost sod all, by the way - somehow, this photo slipped in which shows us a group of people committing the incredibly violent act of walking
It proves sod,yeah ask the people who are out of work and cars that are smashed and insurance claims they have to pay,you know that deductible thing.
Yes all hand in hand,just waiting for the next Bus to come along.Hey why didn't the bus stop for us?

 

[Northstar]

I already answered your first question,"Police have face recognition"

That doesn't even come close to answering my question.

Do you really believe none of those incidents would have occurred if masks weren't allowed?

Don't bother doing your little runaround thing with this post either as I won't see it.