Welcome to the Free Talk Live bulletin board system!
This board is closed to new users and new posts.  Thank you to all our great mods and users over the years.  Details here.
185859 Posts in 9829 Topics by 1371 Members
Latest Member: cjt26
Home Help
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Profile of Highline
| |-+  Show Posts
| | |-+  Messages

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Highline

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
I just saw a show prep item: http://www.freetalklive.com/content/dianne_feinstein_%E2%80%98i_carried_concealed_weapon%E2%80%99

It reminded me of a memorandum I read several years ago...  and I wanted to share it here.

The memorandum was the US DOJ putting a quash on the Associate Attorney General allowing the Director of the USMS from granting "federal carry permits" to untrained members of Congress.  (The same members of Congress who advocate for taking firearm rights away.)

Here's the memo: http://www.justice.gov/olc/depmar.htm

No wonder appropriations were so good.

Well good. Things were starting to look fun again. Problem solved.

The only thing "Da-ude" was doing was trying to push my buttons...as a sock-puppet account for the banned user "Dragline."

He frustrates me because I've actually had a few decent conversations with him about replacing government services with free market alternatives.

The bigotry I find nearly impossible to tolerate.

The Show / 10/25/12 - Jay Noone filing lawsuit over tax sold home.
« on: October 26, 2012, 10:26:09 AM »
If Jay Noone files a federal lawsuit against the Town of Palmer, MA (and especially one against their lawyer), I predict that he will be sanctioned by the federal court for filing a frivolous case.  I don't think that Jay will even have the chance to present the case to a jury as it will be dismissed at summary judgement by the judge.  This will happen because his case is grounded in legal arguments (decided by judge) rather than facts (decided by jury).

I completely understand the philosophical argument behind tax-sales being tantamount to theft.  In the reality that we live tax-sales are considered by courts to be legitimate uses of government power.  Challenges to long lines of precedent (like some federal income tax arguments) are considered frivolous by courts and can get people in significant trouble.  Like it or not, it is the reality in which we live.

I really think Jay should talk to a lawyer before he does these things independently.

Have you done so? My question is why a cop would hurt a person in cuffs more, unless they were simply a sadist. I was hoping there was a simple answer. To clarify the "friends" I am referring to were wanting to get some digs in on a couple guys I had already beaten. They were spiteful and pathetic, but I didn't really beat them up I guess I just pulled them off and tossed them aside with a bit more then minimum force. Sorry if I came off accusitory.

While acting as an agent of public authority I have tasered someone who was in handcuffs.  The short story:

- Arrested a person for driving while inebriated and assault at a bar.  

- The person resisted arrest and I had to physically subdue them to get them into handcuffs.

- The person verbally refused to get in the police car.

- I tried to gently force the person into the car.  The person fought back with their legs.

- I warned them numerous times that I would tase them if they didn't get in the car.  (I think I told them I would ask them 10 times before taseing them.)

- I fired the taser, the person fell in the car.

- There was some sort of unofficial internal review of how I used the taser.  I never faced allegations of violation of policy, but I do know my bosses were not thrilled with how I handled the situation.

- An attorney for the person I arrested investigated my use of taser, but they never filed suit.

In handing this particularly drunk and combative individual (female and of particularly small stature), I believe I did the right thing.  The alternative to getting the person into the police car would have been to use pepper spray or brute force.  Brute force against someone petite, female, combative, intoxicated, and in handcuffs can result in serious "color of law" civil rights violations claim.  

Apprehending intoxicated and combative people of the opposite sex without hurting them or opening yourself up to a federal lawsuit...  is tricky.  

The police have seconds to make decisions that lawyers and the public have months to critique.  This, of course, is the justification for all of the immunity that the police get when they DO legitimately screw up.  

Maybe the government should be outright prohibited from arguing for immunity when its agents do outrageous things so long as their official hiring policies are like this: http://www.defendingthetruth.com/topic/7380-judge-rules-that-police-can-bar-high-iq-scores/.

General / Re: Re: Who the Hell's calling from NH?
« on: September 13, 2012, 01:09:00 PM »
I call from time to time.

General / Re: Re: Re: I like big pecs and I cannot lie
« on: September 13, 2012, 12:43:16 PM »
Not these though. They're huge, but they're too bulbous and round. They look like a woman's boobs.

They really do.

Why would someone taze a handcuffed person? I never continued abusing a downed person. I have beaten up "friends" that attempted to do so though, that sort of thing pisses me off.

Are you speaking about my doing that?

She may be a skilled debater, her policies are still socialist though.

General / Re: Re: Joining FSP & moving to NH?
« on: September 04, 2012, 03:32:37 PM »
You just single-handedly solved this problem!  Genius!


Well I must admit I'm slightly flattered that there isn't a "less Bradley, please" thread.... 


but it is painfully obvious to me that he is a statist.

I'm a pragmatist.  The police exist, wishing them away won't work, so why not make them better AND more accountable.

Simply put, the man made excuses for the police tazing a deaf woman, and then went on to suggest that a citizen who aimed a taser at a cop, would be shot, and that the cop wouldnt be in the wrogn for doing so.

They were wrong to do it...  but I bet you the reason why they did is because they didn't know she was deaf.  If you recall, I tried to pin down exactly what the dispatcher knew (ie: she called with a TTY machine).  Don't discount the fact that society expects officers to respond to intense situations with very limited information.  It would be the same thing with private protection services, although I imagine the services would actually be more accountable.

Just because a story is read on the internet doesn't mean that all the facts are true.

Regarding someone trying to taser a police officer: you WILL be shot.  Police are trained to treat being tased as deadly force because when they are incapacitated anyone can grab their firearm and shoot them.  

In past episodes, he has admitted to pepper spraying people in cuffs, and seems to feel no remorse over it.

That situation I handled incorrectly.  I do regret making that choice, but I would definitely handle that situation better were it to happen again.

He is a statist, and obviously supports a society in which the police and the citizens are of different classes.

I respectfully disagree.

Shame on Mark and Ali for not taking him to task over this. I don't know why the show hosts tip toe around these issues, when Bradley is on, but you need to take him to task on these absurd positions.

I join you in encouraging them to turn the heat up on me.  I posted your thread on my Facebook wall and tagged Ali and Mark.

General / Re: The Uniform Commercial Code and the Common Law
« on: June 01, 2012, 06:26:33 AM »
Are you a sovereign citizen?

Me?  Nah, I'm too much of a believer in possibility of the government being corrected to operate lawfully and ethically.

LRN.FM - The Liberty Radio Network / Re: Bad Quaker Podcast
« on: May 29, 2012, 07:13:57 PM »
Me too.

Ben does an amazing job.

General / Re: Will Porcfest 2012 be the beginning of the end?
« on: May 29, 2012, 07:13:14 PM »
The fucked up thing is that even giving away beer to someone is a felony in NH.  At least that's what Brad Jardis told me.  So, therefore any giving away or accepting "donations" or selling a pencil and giving a free beer, or anything EXCEPT each individual buying beer from a licensed vendor is a felony. 

It's insane.

I apologize if I communicated incorrectly.  Giving away liquor is legal....  Direct and indirect sales are not.

General / Re: The Uniform Commercial Code and the Common Law
« on: May 29, 2012, 05:34:23 AM »
Speaking as someone who enforced traffic law  for over a decade, I simply disbelieve any of these UCC arguments. 

Have you a video of this legal reasoning working in front of a court?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6

Page created in 0.472 seconds with 32 queries.