Unlike the Conservative Liblover, Why do Liberals 'HATE' So Much?

[Poor Richard Saunders]

And you think the appropriate punishment is she be murdered in cold blood. You can whine all you like but the only person who suffered that day was an unarmed woman murdered in cold blood.

I have no regard for your morally fucked up opinions

Let me see if I have your position correct.

If you, Yakuda, has security persons outside your home and a group of people attack that security and then break into your home while shouting things like "Kill Yakuda", the security can no longer shoot anyone even if one of that group enters the bedroom through a broken door where you might be hiding unless there is an obvious weapon on that person. That would mean you have also forfeited any defense where you could shoot someone unless they were visibly armed.

Congratulations for being against the castle doctrine.

 

[Yakuda]

Let me see if I have your position correct.

If you, Yakuda, has security persons outside your home and a group of people attack that security and then break into your home while shouting things like "Kill Yakuda", the security can no longer shoot anyone even if one of that group enters the bedroom through a broken door where you might be hiding unless there is an obvious weapon on that person. That would mean you have also forfeited any defense where you could shoot someone unless they were visibly armed.

Congratulations for being against the castle doctrine.

If an attacker poses an imminent threat then yes. How close was Ashli Babbitt to killing someone?

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

If an attacker poses an imminent threat then yes. How close was Ashli Babbitt to killing someone?

So, police can't kill anyone unless they are close to killing someone? That seems a bit odd considering your defense of Derick Chauvin.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

If an attacker poses an imminent threat then yes. How close was Ashli Babbitt to killing someone?

But let's examine this in light of your house again. There are 50 people in your house. Some of them are yelling "Kill Yakuda." but you are saying that you would let 20 people into your bedroom where you are hiding before you finally shot the one with a visible weapon? Even you can't be that stupid.

 

[Yakuda]

So, police can't kill anyone unless they are close to killing someone? That seems a bit odd considering your defense of Derick Chauvin.

Oh ok sou think they should just be able to kill people because they think someone is an "imminent" threat. St George of Fentanyl wasnt following directions but should he had died? No but Chauvin didnt kill him.

 

[Yakuda]

But let's examine this in light of your house again. There are 50 people in your house. Some of them are yelling "Kill Yakuda." but you are saying that you would let 20 people into your bedroom where you are hiding before you finally shot the one with a visible weapon? Even you can't be that stupid.

I notice you didnt answer my question. Figures

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Oh ok sou think they should just be able to kill people because they think someone is an "imminent" threat. St George of Fentanyl wasnt following directions but should he had died? No but Chauvin didnt kill him.

Chauvin did kill him. Your denials of reality don't change reality. In this case you simply deny that a police officer acted the way they did. It reveals your hypocrisy and how you try to defend it.

Police kill people all the time because they are an "imminent threat" even when they aren't a threat. Police only need a perceived threat. A large mob threatening to kill people is an actual threat. Ashli Babbit was part of that mob. She was entering a restricted area through a broken window carrying a backpack on a day when backpacks with explosives had been found at two locations.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

I notice you didnt answer my question. Figures

I notice you are trying to run away from your position on when a threat is a threat. Figures.

You aren't stupid enough to say you have to wait until the 20th person enters so you deflect because otherwise you would have to admit your stance is unreasonable.

 

[Yakuda]

Chauvin did kill him. Your denials of reality don't change reality. In this case you simply deny that a police officer acted the way they did. It reveals your hypocrisy and how you try to defend it.

Police kill people all the time because they are an "imminent threat" even when they aren't a threat. Police only need a perceived threat. A large mob threatening to kill people is an actual threat. Ashli Babbit was part of that mob. She was entering a restricted area through a broken window carrying a backpack on a day when backpacks with explosives had been found at two locations.

no he didnt

 

[Yakuda]

I notice you are trying to run away from your position on when a threat is a threat. Figures.

You aren't stupid enough to say you have to wait until the 20th person enters so you deflect because otherwise you would have to admit your stance is unreasonable.

Thats funny coming from someone who did answer a question

My stance is quite reasonable which is what pisses you off

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

no he didnt

Denial of reality. It seems to be a way of life for you.

Chauvin failed to stop his actions and administer aid to Floyd even when multiple people pointed out the distress Floyd was in. That makes him culpable.

Chauvin is responsible for the death because he used a hold that was not allowed under police procedure and then failed to administer aid.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Thats funny coming from someone who did answer a question

My stance is quite reasonable which is what pisses you off

Still running away I see.

If some people in a large group are threatening to kill you and part of that group starts to enter the room you are in, do you wait until you see someone with a weapon before you shoot? Do you wait until the 20th person is in the room? That is a simple question that goes to the heart of your argument.

 

[AProudLefty]

So when your fellow Marxists break into ICE facilities - which they do all the time, they should be shot dead without word or warning - as you did to Ashli Babbett?

Deflection.

According to you Marxists, entering a secure area justifies, nay DEMANDS, immediate, summary execution. So anyone breaching a secure zone with ICE should be instantly shot dead - and you Epsteinites won't utter a word of protest, right?

Deflection.

 

[AProudLefty]

Fuck off with your Reichstag Fire.

You vermin attack police every single day. And you have tried to murder the POTUS on 7 occasions in order to overthrow the United States Govenment.

So shove J6 up your ass, scumbag.

I did?

 

[Yakuda]

Still running away I see.

If some people in a large group are threatening to kill you and part of that group starts to enter the room you are in, do you wait until you see someone with a weapon before you shoot? Do you wait until the 20th person is in the room? That is a simple question that goes to the heart of your argument.

Bottom line is had that been a black unarmed woman you leftists would have squealed like the filthy pigs you are for 6 months. You demoncraps should the name of your party to the double standard party.

 

[AProudLefty]

Bullshit. Breaking into my home is not the same at the capitol. I have dont have security guards and the breach of my front door is direct access to me and pose and imminent threatt to me and my family. When Ashli Babbitt was murdered in cold cold she posed no imminent threat to anyone. idiot

Why do you keep talking about security guards?

The mob was a threat.

 

[Yakuda]

Why do you keep talking about security guards?

The mob was a threat.

Because a security guard murdered an unarmed woman in cold blood dipshit. Every threat should be handled by killing an unarmed person in cold blood? Good t oknow.

 

[AProudLefty]

Because a security guard murdered an unarmed woman in cold blood dipshit. Every threat should be handled by killing an unarmed person in cold blood? Good t oknow.

So your security guard should let the violent mob pass?

 

[Yakuda]

So your security guard should let the violent mob pass?

who said that? Did an armed security guard need to murder an unarmed woman in cold blood? Was she the only imminent threat? Why was only she murdered? According to you the guards could have legitimately murdered them all right? The MOB was a threat just like her correct?

 

[AProudLefty]

who said that? Did an armed security guard need to murder an unarmed woman in cold blood? Was she the only imminent threat? Why was only she murdered? According to you the guards could have legitimately murdered them all right? The MOB was a threat just like her correct?

So yes he should have let the violent mob pass?