Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
August 22, 2014, 06:57:56 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
  Home Help Calendar Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 259
51  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: Please contact your Congress Person and ask them to support Rand's Bill. on: August 04, 2014, 05:33:58 PM
Yes.  Rand needs to build his resume.  Aside from gridlock and his daddy's name, Rand hasn't really stood out in congress as a guy who has led the charge on a lot of legislation.  Good bill.

Yeah, cause Obama was so accomplished when he got elected.  Oh wait...  Roll Eyes

52  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: With the open border, it won't be long before we have another invader on: August 04, 2014, 04:51:56 PM
This Ebola shit is such a media creation.

Talking 'growing fears' over it every I see an article.

Roll Eyes

I've yet to meet anyone who gives a fuck. 

Wake me up when it actually becomes a real problem.

53  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: Ventura wins $1.8M from Chris Kyles estate on: August 04, 2014, 04:48:05 PM
Not at all... plenty of Marines and Seals that he worked with has substantiated a lot of his book. Trust me, if that stuff was bogus, some Marine or other military uniy would have made a huge stink about how bullshit it was. Military folks LIVE to correct each other.

His katrina story definitely seems exaggerated..
 But who knows, stranger shit has happened. Another thing you havr to remember as wrll is a lot of these giys like telling civilians stupid tall tales to get a reaction and then joke with their buddies about it later. I dont remember the katrina thing being anywhere in the book, so im noy sure about how that came up.

Either way,  theres far more of his military life substantiated than Venturas. Id still take hos word (and rhe SEALs in the bar) over Venturas any day of the week.

Ventura is a professional politician, a PROVEN liar, and a borderline fruitbat in recent years.

Again, just my .02. Others have said that ventura has made quite the ass put of himself at military events before as well.

See, this just doesn't register as true.  I've just finished up Marcus Luttrel's 'Lone Survivor' - great read, btw.

Anyhow, he was noting that Ventura regularly gives grads of BUD/S phase one a congratulatory speech.  I'm thinking the SEAL brass just wouldn't allow it if they thought or knew Ventura was out lying about his service.

Also - just judging from the Book - Phase One is the hardest, most challenging part.  The rest is more tactical, underwater, learning their specialty like being a medic, etc.  So if Ventura go through Phase One, props to him, regardless of whether he went another direction for training.

54  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: 5 NYPD cops choke unarmed man to death on: August 04, 2014, 04:41:49 PM
Here's all we know about NYPD officer Daniel Pantaleo & his use of excessive force:

Pantaleo is an 8-year NYPD veteran.

He has been sued twice within the past two years for alleged civil rights violations.

In the first suit, two men claim Pantaleo and other officers stopped and strip-searched them in broad daylight while they were driving. The officers handcuffed Darren Collins and Tommy Rice and “Pantaleo and/or Conca pulled down the plaintiffs’ pants and underwear, and touched and searched their genital areas, or stood by while this was done in their presence,” the lawsuit alleged. Eventually the men were criminally charged — according to Collins and Rice’s lawyer, Pantaleo had falsely claimed that he saw crack and heroin in plain view, on the vehicle’s back seat, allowing the officers to arrest everyone in the car. The two men each received $15,000 settlements from the city.

In the second suit, Rylawn Walker accused Pantaleo of arresting him on Feb. 16, 2012 even though he was “committing no crime at that time and was not acting in a suspicious manner.” That case is still pending.

All three men were men of color.

According to Collins and Rice’s attorney, Jason Leventhal, who regularly handles civil rights cases lodged against the NYPD, Pantaleo ignored a “life-or-death rule of the NYPD patrol guide” prohibiting chokeholds, and ignored the department’s use-of-force continuum.

The tactic, which can be fatal, is prohibited by departmental policy.

According to Section 203-11 of the NYPD Patrol Guide: “Members of the New York City Police Department will not use choke holds. A choke hold shall include, but is not limited to, any pressure to the throat or windpipe, which may prevent or hinder breathing or reduce intake of air.”

Chokeholds were banned 20 years ago after the death of a young man, Anthony Baez, who was killed in a confrontation with police after a football he was tossing with friends hit a police car. The officer who choked Baez to death was ultimately sentenced to seven years in prison.

Wow.  What a great cop.  Roll Eyes
55  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: 5 NYPD cops choke unarmed man to death on: August 04, 2014, 04:31:47 PM
6'1 400 lbs, and with 31 prior arrests. Forget about skin color.  Once this "unarmed man" tells the cops he's not coming quietly, all bets are off.

And FYI what's the alternative? Should the police just apologize for the intrusion and walk away? Fuck it. Why have laws at all?

It is mind boggling to witness the black "community" get riled up for such a fat, disgusting criminal. Meanwhile, innocent men, women and children are killed in the  "community" on a daily basis and nobody bats an eyebrow. Reminds me of Trayvon!

Yeah, the cops should be able to go from light force to murder immediately.  A reasonable progression of force?  Well, that's completely unreasonable.  Roll Eyes

I agree though, reminds me of the people who were claiming the size difference between Trayvon and George was immaterial because Zimmerman was such a marshmallow.  Now we're dealing with an even bigger marshmallow and suddenly he's some huge threat that must be contended with.   And we know these cops will claim they were in fear of their lives.

BTW...what did you think of the cop waving happily to the camera at the very end?  Well AFTER he knew the guy was dead.

56  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: Please contact your Congress Person and ask them to support Rand's Bill. on: August 04, 2014, 04:26:22 PM
The law enforcement unions, among others, will come out against this.

I'm sure, but if people will send the reps a quick email, those unions can be overcome.
57  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: Impeachment? Hahahaha on: July 30, 2014, 02:46:09 PM
Just imagine how much the next president - no matter what political party - is going to abuse the shit out of the office/law, knowing darn well if they didn't impeach obama, and they didn't impeach Bush, their ass is probably safe too.

Exactly.  IMO, Chris Christie is already benefiting from the level of stupidity libs have brought in.  Stop holding the POTUS to the highest of standards and expecting him to be responsible for people in his admin, and the shit just rolls down hill.

58  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Please contact your Congress Person and ask them to support Rand's Bill. on: July 30, 2014, 02:41:55 PM

I think...maybe...we can all agree that the abuse of civil forfeiture should be curbed - regardless of political leaning.

Rand Paul introduces bill to reform civil asset forfeiture

This is a pretty big deal, especially if Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) can round up enough co-sponsors to build some momentum.

Sen. Rand Paul yesterday introduced S. 2644, the FAIR (Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration) Act, which would protect the rights of citizens and restore the Fifth Amendment’s role in seizing property without due process of law. Under current law, law enforcement agencies may take property suspected of involvement in crime without ever charging, let alone convicting, the property owner. In addition, state agencies routinely use federal asset forfeiture laws; ignoring state regulations to confiscate and receive financial proceeds from forfeited property.

The FAIR Act would change federal law and protect the rights of property owners by requiring that the government prove its case with clear and convincing evidence before forfeiting seized property.

The bill would also require states “to abide by state law when forfeiting seized property.” This is important. Currently, a number of state legislatures across the country have passed reform bills to rein in forfeiture abuses. The problem is that the federal government has a program known as “adoption” or “equitable sharing.” Under the program, a local police agency need only call up the Drug Enforcement Administration, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives or similar federal agency. That agency then “federalizes” the investigation, making it subject to federal law. The federal agency then initiates forfeiture proceedings under the laxer federal guidelines for forfeiture. The feds take a cut and then return the rest — as much as 80 percent — back to the local agency. This trick thwarts the intent of state legislature that have attempted to make civil forfeiture more fair when it comes to burden of proof, protections for innocent property owners and eliminating the perverse incentive of allowing forfeiture proceeds to go to the same police agency that made the seizure.

Which brings us to a final important provision in the bill: It would “would remove the profit incentive for forfeiture by redirecting forfeitures assets from the Attorney General’s Asset Forfeiture Fund to the Treasury’s General Fund.” Read the full text of the bill here.

Paul, along with Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), appears to be walking the walk when it comes to criminal justice reform. In addition to the redemption bill he and Booker co-sponsored that I wrote about a few weeks ago, Paul also recently introduced a bill that would bar the federal government from prosecuting medical marijuana patients in states where medical marijuana is legal.

I’ve seen some critics on social media and elsewhere point out that Paul appears to be positioning himself for a presidential run, so this may just all be part of his run-up to 2016. As I wrote in my prior post, I’m skeptical of the notion. This particular bill notwithstanding (civil asset forfeiture is extremely unpopular, and there is actually a history of Republican-led reform on this issue), it seems unlikely that most of these reforms are going to help Paul in the Republican primaries. And as Emily Bazelon has pointed out, it isn’t at all clear how a policy such as restoring voting rights to felons would benefit Republicans. It’s far more likely to hurt them. It seems to me that Paul is actually leading on these issues.

But even if Paul’s reform crusade is all political posturing, so what? If these bills pass and result in needed reforms, I doubt that the former prisoners with restored voting rights, the victims of forfeiture abuse or the ex-inmates who can now pursue a second chance at life with a clean record will care much about the motivations of the sponsors of the bills that made those things happen.

More encouraging, think about what this allegation that Paul is posturing really means. In 1996, the House speaker sponsored a bill that would have allowed for the execution of marijuana distributors. That former speaker, Newt Gingrich, more recently advocated for prison reform. (Aside: It’s worth noting that Gingrich is all over the place on these issues — in the same year that he wrote the linked op-ed, he praised the draconian drug policies of Singapore, where drug dealers can face mandatory execution.) A U.S. president who left office as recently as 1992 once suggested something similar.

Today, two states have decriminalized marijuana, at least two more will soon vote on the matter, and not only is a leading contender for the Republican presidential nomination introducing bills to dramatically reform the criminal justice system, some of his critics are suggesting that he’s only doing so because it is politically popular. That’s a huge amount of progress in a short amount of time.

59  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: Liberal Hypocrisy on: July 30, 2014, 02:36:26 PM
I've made Bum my bitch so many times that he knows he's better off ignoring me than getting his ass handed to him again.

How come nobody's ever seen that?

In fact, usually we see you dangling from his ball sack, pathetically desperate for him to even acknowledge your existence, endlessly hoping he'll toss you a word or phrase here and there.

Kinda pathetic really.

And creepy...
60  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: Police State - Official Thread on: July 28, 2014, 06:32:40 PM
Of course she should have been 100% subservient. Anything less is undemocratic according to NYPD Commissioner Bratton who said: "It's important that when an officer does approach you to correct your behavior, that you respect them. That's what democracy's all about." (source)

Yeah, you read that right. I have just one question: WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED TO THIS COUNTRY AND ITS PEOPLE?!?

I was not aware...thank you and unfuckingreal!

Poldaktalos - yes, enormous bullshit and complete hypocrisy.

61  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: Police State - Official Thread on: July 28, 2014, 05:40:23 PM
Lawsuit: CHP officer falsified reports after being filmed pummelling 51-year-old woman

California Highway Patrol Officer Daniel L. Andrew straddled 51-year-old Marlene Pinnock and punched her for 10 to 15 seconds on July 1 before arresting the homeless woman, the lawsuit stated.

Andrew falsified reports of the incident, omitting his repeated punching, and saying Pinnock was combative and called him the devil, according to the lawsuit, which was filed July 17.

CHP officials are also accused of using a felony search warrant to obtain Pinnock’s medical records, which include private conversations between herself, her doctors and her lawyers.

She called him the devil.  She clearly contributed to her own beating.  She should've been 100% subservient...that would've stopped the abuse.

Oh boy...
62  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: Illegals demand representation in White House meetings on: July 28, 2014, 04:56:39 PM
I'm going to Mexico City and demanding representation... lol

Illegal immigrants plan to picket the White House Monday afternoon, calling on fellow immigrant-rights advocacy groups to refuse to meet with the Obama administration until President Obama specifically includes illegal immigrants in any future meetings.

“We are among the millions of people who will either benefit or be harmed by the decisions the President makes, and we are here to represent ourselves in any future negotiations,” said Rosi Carrasco, one of organizers, in a statement announcing the action.

Read more:
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

I'm surprised he hasn't apologized to them for how horrible this country is.  Then thank them for all wanting to come here.

63  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: Police State - Official Thread on: July 28, 2014, 04:52:04 PM
July 21, 2014 6:10 PM
It’s Time for Conservatives to Stop Defending Police
There is nothing conservative about government violating the rights of citizens.

By A. J. Delgado

Imagine if I were to tell you there is a large group of government employees, with generous salaries and ridiculously cushy retirement pensions covered by the taxpayer, who enjoy incredible job security and are rarely held accountable even for activities that would almost certainly earn the rest of us prison time. When there is proven misconduct, these government employees are merely reassigned and are rarely dismissed. The bill for any legal settlements concerning their errors? It, too, is covered by the taxpayers. Their unions are among the strongest in the country.

No, I’m not talking about public-school teachers.

I’m talking about the police.

We conservatives recoil at the former; yet routinely defend the latter — even though, unlike teachers, police officers enjoy an utter monopoly on force and can ruin — or end — one’s life in a millisecond.

For decades, conservatives have served as stalwart defenders of police forces. There have been many good reasons for this, including long memories of the post-countercultural crime wave that devastated, and in some cases destroyed, many American cities; conservatives’ penchant for law and order; and Americans’ widely shared disdain for the cops’ usual opponents. (“Dirty hippies being arrested? Good!” is not an uncommon sentiment.) Although tough-on-crime appeals have never been limited to conservative politicians or voters, conservatives instinctively (and, it turned out, correctly) understood that the way to reduce crime is to have more cops making more arrests, not more sociologists identifying more root causes. Conservatives are rightly proud to have supported police officers doing their jobs at times when progressives were on the other side.

But it’s time for conservatives’ unconditional love affair with the police to end.

Let’s get the obligatory disclaimer out of the way: Yes, many police officers do heroic works and, yes, many are upstanding individuals who serve the community bravely and capably.

But respecting good police work means being willing to speak out against civil-liberties-breaking thugs who shrug their shoulders after brutalizing citizens.

More of this great read here:

Times may be a changing.  Hell, on this thread it's almost exclusively people on the right, right leaning, or libertarian leaning against the creeping police state.

My currently unproven, untested, but probably accurate theory is the libs love the police state....especially when they can use it to enforce compliance.  But, to listen to Peter King talk is basically an endorsement for an even greater police state (his interview with Stossel is sickening).  We're fucked all around.

64  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: 16 for '16: The Most Talked-About Potential GOP Presidential Candidates on: July 28, 2014, 04:36:41 PM
but if he's not supported by Fox News he won't stand a chance.

So Fox supported Obama...twice.  Interesting.  Probably why I don't care for them too much.

65  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: 5 NYPD cops choke unarmed man to death on: July 23, 2014, 05:34:01 PM

On a related note, what IS an INDISPUTABLE FACT, is that come October 20, the Steelers will bring excessive force and pain down on the Texans.
66  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: 5 NYPD cops choke unarmed man to death on: July 23, 2014, 04:36:10 PM
im not blaming him for their excessive actions, their actions where wrong no matter what. Fact of the matter is without his actions of refusing orders and resisting arrest none of that would have occured.

He helped create the enviroment where a physical altercation was needed. AGAIN THERE IS NO DENYING THIS

First, that's not a fact, that's your assumption.

You can never know what might have happened.  I thought you were pushing for us to be 'intellectually honest'.

Second, necessitating an escalation in force is not contributing to his own death.  In fact, it happens all the time, every day, throughout the world....and these people are not attempting to get themselves killed, lol.

We're just running in circles now, so have at the last word.
67  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: 5 NYPD cops choke unarmed man to death on: July 23, 2014, 04:06:40 PM
Too late for that, nobody seems to understand you can condemn both his actions and the cops actions.

This has nothing to do with condemning his actions.  I don't think he should have resisted - unless the arrest was unlawful.

But that's not the issue here.

The issue is your attempt to blame the victim for the actions of the abuser.

68  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: 5 NYPD cops choke unarmed man to death on: July 23, 2014, 04:04:36 PM
LMFAO I am in no way defending the cops. I am being intellectually honest is all.

A man has no right to get physical with his woman. The cops DO!!!!

Now the amount of physical force was OBVIOUSLY excessive that doesnt excuse the man escalating the situation.

Everyone in the situation could have handled themselves better, do you agree?

Getting 'physical' with the guy is not the issue.

Excessive force is the issue and the cops DO NOT have a right to do so, anymore than the abusive husband has a right to get 'physical'.

Blaming the victim for the actions of the abuser is completely absurd.

69  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: Terror watch list has grown exponentially since 2009 on: July 22, 2014, 07:48:20 PM
And with no means of getting your name off it.  WTF?
70  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: Romney v Obama debate - LMFAO x 1,000,000 how wrong O-twink was on: July 22, 2014, 07:46:02 PM
Careful now.  You already have two groupies. 

33 must be slacking.  I think he used to have like 6 stalkers at one point.

Gotta step up the pace, lol.
71  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: 5 NYPD cops choke unarmed man to death on: July 22, 2014, 07:43:29 PM
I am not arguing that all resistance is the same but to say that his actions did not result in the escalation of the situation is dishonest...

he is dead b/c he refused the orders and resisted being taken into custody by abusive cops who failed to control themselves. The abusive cops with lack of control would not have been in the situation to be abusive and lose control enough to kill him if he had not helped escalate the situation. THAT DOES NOT EXCUSE THE COPS ACTIONS

I think youre to emotionally involved in this bro. I have not once defended the cops actions, they should be dealt with as the force used was excessive.

But that doesnt excuse the mans actions either, he had a hand in the escalation of the situation. There is absolutely no way to deny that!!!

Of course you're defending the cops.  You're just trying to play it both ways.

This is the crux of your argument and says it all:
"The abusive cops with lack of control would not have been in the situation to be abusive and lose control enough to kill him if he had not helped escalate the situation"

They were NOT in a situation to be abusive and lose control.  You want it to be that way because you want to claim he's partially at fault.   

This is like a saying a battered woman contributed to her own beating because she did something to trigger the abusive I said, an absurd argument.

72  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: 5 NYPD cops choke unarmed man to death on: July 22, 2014, 06:45:10 PM
Skip he resisted being taken into custody, if had been peaceful and cooperative do you think they would have put him in a chokehold?

if not, then yes his actions played a role in the escalation of the situation. There is no way to dispute that...

who said anything about being obedient? there is a time and a place for everything and when youre surrounded by 3 cops its not the time to resist being taken into custody!!!!

would it make it better if he was guilty skip?

Of course it's disputable and you're merely trying to argue that all resistance is the same. 

Trying to argue that because he put up light - and we're talking VERY light resistance - means that it led to the cops using an excessive amount of force, thus he contributed to his own death, is absurd.

He's dead because the cops are abusive.

He's dead because the cops failed to control themselves.

They'll probably walk, because all too many people will take your view and think he brought it on himself because wasn't strictly obedient.
73  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: 5 NYPD cops choke unarmed man to death on: July 22, 2014, 02:53:32 AM
disagree, my argument is valid b/c without him resisting and without him refusing to go along with the police he too was responsible for the confrontation.

you cannot willfully get into the confrontation and then take no responsibility for the outcome of that confrontation.

Lol look if they were just talking and the guy got clobbered that would be one thing and I would be right there with you. This guy was given many orders and he refused to go along, he responded to negatively when they tried to take him into custody.

Look I am not defending the cops, they obviously over reacted and need to be dealt with but to say that this guy had no hand in the situation and by extension the outcome is dishonest.

Be polite, do what they ask and after that file a complaint. Dont sit there and get upset and refuse orders and then act suprised when they get physical with you.

Did you guys really expect them to just walk away after he got agitated?

He told them not to touch him and tried to turn away.  That's it!  You're claiming that means he contributed to his own death.  It's absurd.

Strict obedience to authority is not what we as a society should ever be required to display.  He had every right to ask questions of them, and in most State's you have every right to resist an unlawful arrest. have no idea if he was even guilty in this matter, they could have harassing him for his previous record.

Giving that they were willing to murder him over some untaxed smokes, it wouldn't surprise me if the arrest was unlawful to begin with.  Like I said, his big crime was fucking with the salaries of cops, prosecutors, and judges.

74  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: 5 NYPD cops choke unarmed man to death on: July 21, 2014, 07:07:40 PM
Yes malbert who said that?

The cops used excessive force does that mean this guys past and his actions of resisting and refusing to follow orders didn't play a role in this?

Let's all be intellectually honest here and admit the he played a role in his own death.

Meh...he didn't do himself any favors, but I don't think he contributed to his own death.  You're argument is really only valid if he continued to escalate his resistance to a point where killing him via a choke hold was the only option...and we don't really see that ever happening.

What we see is cops viciously beating the shit outta somebody cause they keep their arms close, or don't move an arm behind their back, or don't drop to their knees immediately, and then our lapdog society buying the officer's bullshit about being in fear of their life.

I don't think Mal was referring to any of us, but I would agree that minorities are disproportionately affected by the abuse.

75  Getbig Main Boards / Politics and Political Issues Board / Re: Israel and Gaza - discussion on: July 21, 2014, 06:55:57 PM
What would $620+ million dollars do to improve our border security? That's what the US is sending Isreal for it's missile security system, about double what was initially allocated. Done with bi-partisan support.

Yea, I'm not big on giving money to either side.  I think we have to help our own first, before we give away to others.  But, this is completely approved yet, so the amount might be reduced, and you can usually see some type of caveat where the money has to be used (or a portion of it) in the U.S.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 259
Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!