US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

Status
Not open for further replies.
BidenGIF.gif
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Informative
Reactions: ThisIsGonnaBeGood, The Shredder, ActualCracker and 120 others
Click to expand...
Sniperwoof said:
I'm actually going to take a contrary opinion and say this is the correct ruling in terms of safeguarding individual liberties.

"Rights are absolute but......" is how we got our current situation where various courts start gleefully chipping away at various constitutionally protected rights until there's nothing left.

Besides Lequimarcus doesn't give a fuck if some court said he's prohibited from owning guns. He's going to march down to main street hand Pooky or Ray Ray $50 and walk away with a High Point.

It's a pointless feel good measure like gun control.
Click to expand...
The purpose of a criminal conviction is the justification for taking away your rights. You get convicted of a crime and go to jail, your right to freedom of movement and right to not have unreasonable searches and seizures is removed.

Sometimes the removal may be permanent such as life in jail without chance of parole, permanent removal of the right to bear arms, or the right to vote. Sometimes they are temporary such as having a 30 jail sentence.

Never in the history of our nation has it ever been accepted that rights cannot be removed when following due process and a criminal conviction.

The best you could get is the protection against cruel and unusual punishment, but no one is arguing that removing the right to bear arms from felons is cruel and unusual.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: like_shutup_&_drive_scoob, 9s cock statue, Exterminatus and 10 others
Are they going to rule that removing your right to vote as a felon until you have completed any and all post-incarceration requirements is also unconstitutional? Because currently you cannot vote in WI if you're on probation for a felony (we also require voter ID). And you know how adamant they are about Jaquavius being able to vote.
 
FlappyBat said:
The purpose of a criminal conviction is the justification for taking away your rights. You get convicted of a crime and go to jail, your right to freedom of movement and right to not have unreasonable searches and seizures is removed.
Click to expand...
My problem with it is more them trying to narrowly slice little bits out, your either free or your not. If you are still considered to be a sufficient danger that you cannot be trusted with the right to have a weapon, then you should still be locked up. If you are considered to be sufficiently reformed to be paroled, or serve your designated term, you should be free. Any further provision should be on the basis of another criminal violation, not preemptive "We will prevent you from breaking the law again by making you less then your fellow free people".
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Bulk Bogan, John.Doe, Exterminatus and 13 others
ForTheHoard said:
How do you guys get so pumped up for a conservative leaning Supreme Court then pretend their decisions don't matter because democrats will ignore it? Ease up on the black pills.
Click to expand...
I'll stop being blackpilled about it when those judges who ignore it get sentenced to lamp post. If Trump gets back in he needs to use every dirty trick possible to get these retard judges, DAs, "civil rights" groups, and NGOs gone. I mean every dirty little trick including having them minecrafted then pardoning the let's player. Plant shit on their hard drive as the glowies are known to do. Gloves need to come fully off.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ShitLurker, Exterminatus, World Famous Quasi Payer and 4 others
chiobu said:
Tranny enablers suddenly supporting women's sports :story:

View attachment 5977706

https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1788924453499306383 (Archive)
Click to expand...
Weird focus shift, but 'technically' he's not wrong. If they wanna have the pay, fame and success of their male counterparts, they need to draw in eyes, and then everything else comes with it. The reason its only 'technically' correct is that its similar to saying midgets just need to jump higher to reach the top shelf, yer just describing the root problem. Their teams and leagues are generally boring. If your there to see peak sportsmanship, the male team is gonna be far more impressive from a capabilities standpoint. If you're getting in for the social and community aspects, there's a century of inertia behind male teams being the ones you already follow, and the people in those social circles and communities aren't exactly the ardent feminist types in the first place.

If you wanna succeed, either be better or be unique, the lame knockoff ain't gonna get you any success. Doing the best you can is admirable, but results are what wins sports games, not effort.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Exterminatus, World Famous Quasi Payer, madethistocomment and 6 others
Kuritan Deplorable said:
Weird focus shift, but 'technically' he's not wrong. If they wanna have the pay, fame and success of their male counterparts, they need to draw in eyes, and then everything else comes with it. The reason its only 'technically' correct is that its similar to saying midgets just need to jump higher to reach the top shelf, yer just describing the root problem. Their teams and leagues are generally boring. If your there to see peak sportsmanship, the male team is gonna be far more impressive from a capabilities standpoint. If you're getting in for the social and community aspects, there's a century of inertia behind male teams being the ones you already follow, and the people in those social circles and communities aren't exactly the ardent feminist types in the first place.

If you wanna succeed, either be better or be unique, the lame knockoff ain't gonna get you any success. Doing the best you can is admirable, but results are what wins sports games, not effort.
Click to expand...
I mean they could spice it up and just play naked. Think of it like ancient Greek sport's only with boobs.
 
  • Like
  • Optimistic
  • Dumb
Reactions: like_shutup_&_drive_scoob, Wayfaring_$tranger, World Famous Quasi Payer and 8 others
Sniperwoof said:
"Rights are absolute but......" is how we got our current situation where various courts start gleefully chipping away at various constitutionally protected rights until there's nothing left.
Click to expand...

Rights aren't absolute. They're conditional on following the law.

Right to property? Break a law, pay a fine.
Right to freedom? Commit a crime, do the time.
Right to life? You can lose it if you commit murder.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Disagree
Reactions: Netizennameless, Geddy Lee's Fee and See, World Famous Quasi Payer and 6 others
HTTP Error 404 said:
Israel can just veto it. Or they can have one of their puppet states veto it for them.
Click to expand...
It's the General Assembly, there are no vetoes

Also it's utterly meaningless because it's the General Assembly, which was created so the non-Security Council members can cope and seethe in their retard containment zone. The General Assembly literally has no power at all except to cope and seethe

Same reason they expanded the Security Council to 15, but the extra 10 have no vetoes and the members get rotated in and out. They can cope and seethe more prominently. It's all a dog and pony soldier show, fat! The only members of the UN that matter in any way are the 5 permanent veto-wielding Security Council members
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: like_shutup_&_drive_scoob, Wintersun, World Famous Quasi Payer and 18 others
draggs said:
It's the General Assembly, there are no vetoes

Also it's utterly meaningless because it's the General Assembly, which was created so the non-Security Council members can cope and seethe in their retard containment zone. The General Assembly literally has no power at all except to cope and seethe

Same reason they expanded the Security Council to 15, but the extra 10 have no vetoes and the members get rotated in and out. They can cope and seethe more prominently. It's all a dog and pony soldier show, fat! The only members of the UN that matter in any way are the 5 permanent veto-wielding Security Council members
Click to expand...
And two of the members are Russia and China, so everything will always get vetoed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: World Famous Quasi Payer, Fatsuit Shinji, FlappyBat and 2 others
The Ugly One said:
Rights aren't absolute. They're conditional on following the law.

Right to property? Break a law, pay a fine.
Right to freedom? Commit a crime, do the time.
Right to life? You can lose it if you commit murder.
Click to expand...
Correct, and that was fine for the majority of our history when for the most part courts were neutral or at least inclined towards a purely contextual reading of the constitution.

We are not that same country, courts are now compromised by neo Marxist activists who go "hmm If you can lose your rights for committing murder maybe people who commit hate speech should lose their rights too."

The old system is no longer sufficient, rights now need to be absolute or they will not exist at all.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Bulk Bogan, John.Doe, Cyber Floyd and 15 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back