Australian Politics Forum - more suppression of free speech

...

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 23673
WA
Gender: male

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #255 - Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:15pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 9:41pm:

... wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 8:49pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 8:33pm:

... wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 8:50am:

"public nuisance" laws are probably more for the protection of nitwits like this than the general public.

If the law isn't going to reign in people acting like dickheads, citizens will, and they're not always going to be so measured about it.

Yeah and that would be governed by criminal laws such as assault, so I'd still prefer 'citizens' govern as opposed to the government, in this particular case.

So people get charged with assault because they are provoked by twits, who get off scot-free? Nah.

If you can't manage your emotions then that's your problem.

Not really. Saying "ooh he can't control his emotions!!!" won't unbreak your jaw.

It happens. I'd rather be safe and healthy than be indignant.

Back to top

In the fullness of time...

IP Logged

ian

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 9451

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #256 - Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:16pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:14pm:

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 9:47pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 9:42pm:

[

When you combine all the factors, the cops don't go 'SHOOT NOW SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT ASK QUESTIONS LATER SHOOT NOW'. No, they get intel on the situation, assess what is happening.

and you know this how?

Because we don't live in a dc comic. Well, not all of us.

Right ha ha. So how do you happen to know appropriate police procedure? Dont be shy, give us the benefit of your experience.

Back to top

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #257 - Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:22pm

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:16pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:14pm:

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 9:47pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 9:42pm:

[

When you combine all the factors, the cops don't go 'SHOOT NOW SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT ASK QUESTIONS LATER SHOOT NOW'. No, they get intel on the situation, assess what is happening.

and you know this how?

Because we don't live in a dc comic. Well, not all of us.

Right ha ha. So how do you happen to know appropriate police procedure? Dont be shy, give us the benefit of your experience.

Well aside from having friends in the police force, I don't live in a dc comic.

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

ian

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 9451

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #258 - Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:23pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:22pm:

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:16pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:14pm:

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 9:47pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 9:42pm:

[

When you combine all the factors, the cops don't go 'SHOOT NOW SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT ASK QUESTIONS LATER SHOOT NOW'. No, they get intel on the situation, assess what is happening.

and you know this how?

Because we don't live in a dc comic. Well, not all of us.

Right ha ha. So how do you happen to know appropriate police procedure? Dont be shy, give us the benefit of your experience.

Well aside from having friends in the police force, I don't live in a dc comic.

Im sure you dont. So your police friends told you this "procedure" is that correct?

Back to top

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #259 - Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:25pm

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:23pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:22pm:

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:16pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:14pm:

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 9:47pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 9:42pm:

[

When you combine all the factors, the cops don't go 'SHOOT NOW SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT ASK QUESTIONS LATER SHOOT NOW'. No, they get intel on the situation, assess what is happening.

and you know this how?

Because we don't live in a dc comic. Well, not all of us.

Right ha ha. So how do you happen to know appropriate police procedure? Dont be shy, give us the benefit of your experience.

Well aside from having friends in the police force, I don't live in a dc comic.

Im sure you dont. So your police friends told you this "procedure" is that correct?

My friends continuously laugh at the assertion that cops run into situations without being informed of the going ons. They aren't drunk batman, killing people with his bare hands.

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #260 - Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:26pm

... wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:15pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 9:41pm:

... wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 8:49pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 8:33pm:

... wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 8:50am:

"public nuisance" laws are probably more for the protection of nitwits like this than the general public.

If the law isn't going to reign in people acting like dickheads, citizens will, and they're not always going to be so measured about it.

Yeah and that would be governed by criminal laws such as assault, so I'd still prefer 'citizens' govern as opposed to the government, in this particular case.

So people get charged with assault because they are provoked by twits, who get off scot-free? Nah.

If you can't manage your emotions then that's your problem.

Not really. Saying "ooh he can't control his emotions!!!" won't unbreak your jaw.

It happens. I'd rather be safe and healthy than be indignant.

I'd rather a person who breaks people's jaws is locked up for doing so.

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

ian

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 9451

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #261 - Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:31pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:25pm:

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:23pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:22pm:

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:16pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:14pm:

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 9:47pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 9:42pm:

[

When you combine all the factors, the cops don't go 'SHOOT NOW SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT SHOOT ASK QUESTIONS LATER SHOOT NOW'. No, they get intel on the situation, assess what is happening.

and you know this how?

Because we don't live in a dc comic. Well, not all of us.

Right ha ha. So how do you happen to know appropriate police procedure? Dont be shy, give us the benefit of your experience.

Well aside from having friends in the police force, I don't live in a dc comic.

Im sure you dont. So your police friends told you this "procedure" is that correct?

My friends continuously laugh at the assertion that cops run into situations without being informed of the going ons. They aren't drunk batman, killing people with his bare hands.

"Continuously laugh at the assertion that cops run into situations without being informed of the going ons." I see. So you mention this scenario to your police friends quite often. why? Why are you "continuously" mentioning this type of scenario to your police friends,?

Back to top

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #262 - Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:32pm

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:31pm:

"Continuously laugh at the assertion that cops run into situations without being informed of the going ons." I see. So you mention this scenario to your police friends quite often. why? Why are you "continuously" mentioning this type of scenario to your police friends,?

I tend to tell them about drunk batman and his opinions, and they laugh at drunk batman

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

ian

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 9451

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #263 - Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:33pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:32pm:

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:31pm:

"Continuously laugh at the assertion that cops run into situations without being informed of the going ons." I see. So you mention this scenario to your police friends quite often. why? Why are you "continuously" mentioning this type of scenario to your police friends,?

I tend to tell them about drunk batman and his opinions, and they laugh at drunk batman

But you only brought this scenario up yesterday. have you been mentioning this continuously to your police friends since then? Why?

Back to top

IP Logged

ian Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 9451	Re: more suppression of free speech Reply #264 - Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:39pm Heres a question for your "police friends " Alevine. Are they trained to run towards danger or away from it? Simple question.
Back to top	IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 23619 Gender:	Re: more suppression of free speech Reply #265 - Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:41pm ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:39pm: Heres a question for your "police friends " Alevine. Are they trained to run towards danger or away from it? Simple question. Towards Danger. Your point is, drunk batman?
Back to top	Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of. IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #266 - Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:41pm

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:33pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:32pm:

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:31pm:

"Continuously laugh at the assertion that cops run into situations without being informed of the going ons." I see. So you mention this scenario to your police friends quite often. why? Why are you "continuously" mentioning this type of scenario to your police friends,?

I tend to tell them about drunk batman and his opinions, and they laugh at drunk batman

But you only brought this scenario up yesterday. have you been mentioning this continuously to your police friends since then? Why?

not at all. This was raised by me a week ago, or whenever this thread was started, and we regularly chat about drunk batman's ludicrous comments, in general, on this forum

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

ian

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 9451

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #267 - Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 11:05pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:41pm:

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:33pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:32pm:

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:31pm:

"Continuously laugh at the assertion that cops run into situations without being informed of the going ons." I see. So you mention this scenario to your police friends quite often. why? Why are you "continuously" mentioning this type of scenario to your police friends,?

I tend to tell them about drunk batman and his opinions, and they laugh at drunk batman

But you only brought this scenario up yesterday. have you been mentioning this continuously to your police friends since then? Why?

not at all. This was raised by me a week ago, or whenever this thread was started, and we regularly chat about drunk batman's ludicrous comments, in general, on this forum

Thats strange. Your police friends seem to have 2 opinions on this scenario which was only brought up on this forum yesterday and which you claim to have been discussing continuously with your police friends since then. Firstly you claim their training is to stop, "assess the intel" and work out a plan before proceeeding. (intel, i like that word, never heard it used in real life but what would I know, you are the expert here) Now you claim they have been trained to run towards the dangerous situation. maybe you need to confirm with your "police friends" exactly what their procedure is, being just a "drunk batman", i need to know this. Dont want to get myself in a sticky situation.

Back to top

IP Logged

sir prince duke alevine

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 23619
Gender: male

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #268 - Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 11:07pm

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 11:05pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:41pm:

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:33pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:32pm:

ian wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 10:31pm:

"Continuously laugh at the assertion that cops run into situations without being informed of the going ons." I see. So you mention this scenario to your police friends quite often. why? Why are you "continuously" mentioning this type of scenario to your police friends,?

I tend to tell them about drunk batman and his opinions, and they laugh at drunk batman

But you only brought this scenario up yesterday. have you been mentioning this continuously to your police friends since then? Why?

not at all. This was raised by me a week ago, or whenever this thread was started, and we regularly chat about drunk batman's ludicrous comments, in general, on this forum

Thats strange. Your police friends seem to have 2 opinions on this scenario which was only brought up on this forum yesterday and which you claim to have been discussing continuously with your police friends since then. Firstly you claim their training is to stop, "assess the intel" and work out a plan before proceeeding. (intel, i like that word, never heard it used in real life but what would I know, you are the expert here) Now you claim they have been trained to run towards the dangerous situation. maybe you need to confirm with your "police friends" exactly what their procedure is, being just a "drunk batman", i need to know this. Dont want to get myself in a sticky situation.

you do understand that 'running into danger' isn't implied in real life in a literal way, right? It means they won't leave the scene, but they aren't going to go into the scene blind folded and just start shooting at everyone.

Let me ask you, did the cops in the Monas hostage situation run in instantly and start shooting, did they? Seems they were't running into danger, according to the drunk batman.

Sheesh drunk batman, I can see why you fail to kill dangerous criminals with your bare hands so much - you fail at the easiest things.

Back to top

Disclaimer for Mothra per POST so it is forever acknowledged: Saying 'Islam' or 'Muslims' doesn't mean ALL muslims. This does not target individual muslims who's opinion I am not aware of.

IP Logged

ian

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 9451

Re: more suppression of free speech
Reply #269 - Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 11:20pm

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Mar 3^rd, 2016 at 11:07pm:

[

you do understand that 'running into danger' isn't implied in real life in a literal way, right?

yes, thats exactly what it means.
Quote:

It means they won't leave the scene, but they aren't going to go into the scene blind folded and just start shooting at everyone.

i understand it very well. and no, thats not what it means. ask your "police friends" about it.

Back to top

IP Logged