jonhowe

You're seriously demented.

"How does one "look" mean or vindictive? You just hate women"

That's interesting, since I am a woman.

It's called woman's intuition you ought to try it sometime. It's in her eyes--I have seen many more like her in my lifetime.

In the same way that I allow mitigating factors for cops who don't realize their crimes are crimes, I do sort of make a mitigating factor for people who are so screwed over by the police state that they decide to get back at it in the ultimate manner, by lashing out and killing one of the State's own. Mind you, I didn't say it was OK. Only that its a mitigating factor

To put it another way, I am not at the Cantwellian "its great when a cop dies" level. Its a tragedy when it happens, most of them are brainwashed drones who don't really know any better. At the same time, they are all hired muscle for the government and they have all, through their actions, created a perception that it is us against them. The absolute BEST thing a cop can be is an ignorant professional armed robber who is genuinely brainwashed enough to think he has a right to take what he takes. Do I think that means he deserves to die? No, I don't. But I also recognize that he's not innocent, that his crime is "legal", and that a lot of people have truly been screwed over by the gang he works for. To be continued.

I guess I'm probably somewhere between you and AF. If that cop specifically was involved in smething egregious, I wouldn't even think about it, I would just automatically vote "not guilty." If it wasn't that particular cop, but some other cops, I'd honestly feel somewhat conflicted, because on the one hand, I would agree with you that such a random action would be wrong, but on the other hand, I wouldn't feel threatened by Frein, and to some extent it really is "us against them" and I want to side with my fellow citizens. Mind you, I don't think its "us against them" to quite the same absolute level that some people here think it is. But I think its undeniable that its true to some extent. That fact is at least partially, if not mostly, the fault of the police. I have a hard time with the idea of sending a man to prison for the rest of his life, or executing him, for a situation that is quite frankly at least partially the fault of the police.

I agree that it was a crime, but for some reason (half-rational and half maybe not) I would be more upset had the victim been a civilian. I'm hesitant to say what the penalty should be without info. If he had been wronged by police in the past and that sparked this I might consider pardoning him or at least substantially reducing his sentence from what I'd normally support.

jon, for the record, I'm actually on your side with regards to the discussion you are having with AF. I'm still working out my views but I lean toward agreement with you.

I just brought up the kidnapping thing as a possible counter-point. In the OT it was a capital crime, and I don't see anywhere where that was abroggated like I do with the consensual sexual crimes and blasphemy and so forth. Mind you, I am not going to die on the hill of that particular penalty, but the point is that its at least questionable. Its not like kidnapping is something that is so minor that it would be unthinkable to deserve a death penalty.

I agree on being against random violence. Revolution I could support in certain circumstances, although I think it would have to be of a secessionary nature for me to really get behind it. I could also get behind vigilantism against specific aggressors in specific instances, though I'm reluctant. I agree they shouldn't be targeted just for being cops.

You got a lot of neg rep for that post because this forum is ate up with trolls. Fuck 'em...

loved that poem on the gary johnson forum, why does age matter its about principles

You said you were at the Hofstra Protesting? Where do you live man? I live in East Meadow, literally just down the road.