Author Topic: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?  (Read 30974 times)

Coach is Back!

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 59463
  • It’s All Bullshit
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #350 on: June 16, 2021, 10:02:47 AM »
lol 😂

Aside from being totally hamstrung by the MSM, since you were a cop, I’d like to hear your take on defunding the police and especially your take on the assault on our second amendment rights

Agnostic will respond to just about anything I post....except this. Why?

The Scott

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 21320
  • I'm a victim of soicumcision!!
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #351 on: June 16, 2021, 05:31:46 PM »
Agnostic will respond to just another anything I post....except this. Why?

He's a Law Enfarcement Officer. that is why.  A cucktard.

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #352 on: June 18, 2021, 08:59:26 PM »
Agnostic will respond to just about anything I post....except this. Why?

The real answer, regardless of what the cranky resident old man who spouts the equivalent of "get off my lawn"(The scott) says I just saw your post. I don't spend my life here so if you post something wanting my attention shoot me a PM and the very next time I am on here I will respond.

Coach is Back!

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 59463
  • It’s All Bullshit
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #353 on: June 18, 2021, 09:07:16 PM »
lol 😂

Aside from being totally hamstrung by the MSM, since you were a cop, I’d like to hear your take on defunding the police and especially your take on the assault on our second amendment rights

Why won’t Agnostic answer this?

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #354 on: June 18, 2021, 09:13:00 PM »
lol 😂

Aside from being totally hamstrung by the MSM, since you were a cop, I’d like to hear your take on defunding the police and especially your take on the assault on our second amendment rights

I have commented on "defunding the police" before. But I will address it again for you.

In my opinion, "defunding the police" is a stupid term and as such, it cost the left too much from the get go. The person that coined that phrase is probably responsible for causing any potential changes to be stopped dead in its tracks because very few people read past the headlines. So naturally, many right wingers think it means "Defund the Police" when the intention was the "Reallocate funding from some areas to address shortfalls in other areas"

As someone who was the rank of Commander (Think Captiain if your department doesn't have that rank), and 34 years in Law enforcement, I have witnessed the ebb and flow of policing. I have been a part of committees that reviewed results of policing and tried to figure out if the bang was worth the buck. So I am absolutely not opposed to reviewing a departments budget, determining if certain units or specialized services are in fact delivering what they were supposed to and if not, reallocating those funds to places that are showing   or could be showing better results.  Of course I believe we need policing. But I am also open to reviewing where tax dollars are spent to make sure there is value.

I see Texas just approved carrying without a permit so I think your "assault on 2nd amendment " claim is a false narrative. I also think allowing anyone over 21 to carry without any required training is just stupid. but I'm sure we will be revisiting this decision 5 years from now

Coach is Back!

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 59463
  • It’s All Bullshit
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #355 on: June 18, 2021, 10:54:36 PM »
I have commented on "defunding the police" before. But I will address it again for you.

In my opinion, "defunding the police" is a stupid term and as such, it cost the left too much from the get go. The person that coined that phrase is probably responsible for causing any potential changes to be stopped dead in its tracks because very few people read past the headlines. So naturally, many right wingers think it means "Defund the Police" when the intention was the "Reallocate funding from some areas to address shortfalls in other areas"

As someone who was the rank of Commander (Think Captiain if your department doesn't have that rank), and 34 years in Law enforcement, I have witnessed the ebb and flow of policing. I have been a part of committees that reviewed results of policing and tried to figure out if the bang was worth the buck. So I am absolutely not opposed to reviewing a departments budget, determining if certain units or specialized services are in fact delivering what they were supposed to and if not, reallocating those funds to places that are showing   or could be showing better results.  Of course I believe we need policing. But I am also open to reviewing where tax dollars are spent to make sure there is value.

I see Texas just approved carrying without a permit so I think your "assault on 2nd amendment " claim is a false narrative. I also think allowing anyone over 21 to carry without any required training is just stupid. but I'm sure we will be revisiting this decision 5 years from now

This is actually an appreciated great response. Two things though. We (I) know that “defund the police” does mean (in most cases) means re-allocation which is basically the same thing as defunding simply because certain funding is taken away from certain departments leaving those departments vulnerable. Of course departments should review yearly budgets but some of these budget cuts call to dissolve certain departments. LAPD cut their budget by $150mil doing away with their gang units. Sad

It was signed into law yesterday and NRA backed, that Texas is now a constitutional carry states as covered in the Second Amendment. You mentioned required training. I agree with this but not everyone can afford formal firearms training for those who can’t afford it, law abiding citizens still have the constitutional right to protect themselves, families and businesses. HOWEVER, basic knowing your firearm and the at the very least, they should know the four basic rules of handling a firearm and the laws and rules of the Castle Doctrine/Stand your ground laws and yes, I’m also talking about in the now 30-32 constitutional carry states and you’re right, in states like Texas the 2A is revered but still not out of the woods. You have reps like Shiela Jackson Lee trying to introduce HR 127 plus about another 15-16 “gun control” bills in the pipeline. This wouldn’t really have been an issue before but now the left control all three branches and the only one standing the way (thank God) is Joe Manchin.

On this note, Biden nominated a gun-control advocate to head the ATF who sits on many gun-control groups that’s only intention is ultimately gun confiscation.  His name is David Chipman

In blue states the second Amendment is extremely in danger because we have anti-2A advocates within that states government. Certain firearms have to be “California compliant” or it’s a possible felony. Max 10 round mags..why? It’s my constitutional right and the list goes on.

On the issue of more training for cops. I know how they train, drills, etc that being said, they are trained but the problem isn’t more training, the problem is THEY DON’T train but only when it’s mandatory which isn’t much. Most agencies here have to requalify once a year with their duty weapon for about an hour and when something happens a lot wind up getting injured or killed...why? Because they don’t train at least on their own so they either panic and shoot or get shot. I’ve mentioned this before. Only 36% of shots fired from 10ft actually hit their target.



Coach is Back!

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 59463
  • It’s All Bullshit
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #356 on: June 18, 2021, 11:14:49 PM »

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #357 on: June 19, 2021, 12:14:05 AM »
This is actually an appreciated great response. Two things though. We (I) know that “defund the police” does mean (in most cases) means re-allocation which is basically the same thing as defunding simply because certain funding is taken away from certain departments leaving those departments vulnerable. Of course departments should review yearly budgets but some of these budget cuts call to dissolve certain departments. LAPD cut their budget by $150mil doing away with their gang units. Sad

It was signed into law yesterday and NRA backed, that Texas is now a constitutional carry states as covered in the Second Amendment. You mentioned required training. I agree with this but not everyone can afford formal firearms training for those who can’t afford it, law abiding citizens still have the constitutional right to protect themselves, families and businesses. HOWEVER, basic knowing your firearm and the at the very least, they should know the four basic rules of handling a firearm and the laws and rules of the Castle Doctrine/Stand your ground laws and yes, I’m also talking about in the now 30-32 constitutional carry states and you’re right, in states like Texas the 2A is revered but still not out of the woods. You have reps like Shiela Jackson Lee trying to introduce HR 127 plus about another 15-16 “gun control” bills in the pipeline. This wouldn’t really have been an issue before but now the left control all three branches and the only one standing the way (thank God) is Joe Manchin.

On this note, Biden nominated a gun-control advocate to head the ATF who sits on many gun-control groups that’s only intention is ultimately gun confiscation.  His name is David Chipman

In blue states the second Amendment is extremely in danger because we have anti-2A advocates within that states government. Certain firearms have to be “California compliant” or it’s a possible felony. Max 10 round mags..why? It’s my constitutional right and the list goes on.

On the issue of more training for cops. I know how they train, drills, etc that being said, they are trained but the problem isn’t more training, the problem is THEY DON’T train but only when it’s mandatory which isn’t much. Most agencies here have to requalify once a year with their duty weapon for about an hour and when something happens a lot wind up getting injured or killed...why? Because they don’t train at least on their own so they either panic and shoot or get shot. I’ve mentioned this before. Only 36% of shots fired from 10ft actually hit their target.

It's late so I won't parse your response right now but I will say that in many regards we are not in disagreement. Again, if you want a response from me and don't seem to be getting it PM me. I know in the past I spent a lot of time here but lately life has been really interfering with my on line time, and that's not a bad thing. I still enjoy some of the back and forth here but I'd be remiss if I ddin't say I wish they were more like your last post. You really seemed like you werw interested in a conversation.

Grape Ape

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22051
  • SC è un asino
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #358 on: June 19, 2021, 11:43:17 AM »
The above was discussion worth reading.

We all lift, drink bourbon, etc...should be more like that.

/No homo
Y

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40625
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #359 on: June 19, 2021, 03:06:52 PM »
Bro..... not hard to understand...


President Trump was winning the race on election night November 2020 by a wide margin and then suddenly multiple states took a break, quit counting, and by the end of the week the election was flipped to Joe Biden. Mainstream media claimed that Trump lost numerous court cases, but courts across America refused to hear most of the cases.

There are 87 court cases to date based on the 2020 election, and only 24 were decided on the merits of the cases.

Trump and Republicans prevailed in 17 out of the 24 cases, or 71%.

There are still 12 cases that are active.


The 2020 election will go down as arguably the greatest fraud in world history. 

The tremendously popular incumbent candidate, President Trump, was easily winning the race on election night in a landslide and then suddenly multiple states took a break, quit counting, and by the end of the week the election was flipped to Joe Biden.

Then, as the President and his team attempted to address the fraud and alleged abnormalities, the courts refused to hear many of the important cases that impacted the nation and the world.

We’ve heard over and over from Big Media that President Trump and his team lost numerous court cases linked to the 2020 election. 

But this is not accurate.

Here’s what was  identified as provided in an accurate and updated list of court cases

There are 87 court cases to date based on the 2020 election
In 26 cases President Trump was the plaintiff
In 56 cases President Trump was not the plaintiff
In 5 cases President Trump is the defendant
In 24 cases the case was decided on the merits
In 17 of the 24 cases (71%) decided on the merits President Trump and/or the GOP prevailed
12 cases remain active


Here is a link to the list of cases.

looks like you forgot the link.

Coach is Back!

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 59463
  • It’s All Bullshit
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #360 on: June 19, 2021, 03:31:15 PM »
looks like you forgot the link.

I’ve been posting links and saying this since November. This is now common knowledge...it’s been common knowledge.

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40625
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #361 on: June 19, 2021, 03:48:47 PM »
I’ve been posting links and saying this since November. This is now common knowledge...it’s been common knowledge.

Which doesn't change the fact that TheGrinch forgot to insert the link he referenced....Which really has nothing to do with what you've been posting and saying since November or that it is and was common knowledge.

TheGrinch

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5029
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #362 on: June 19, 2021, 04:16:18 PM »
looks like you forgot the link.

dude.. same link as posted before in this thread

http://wiseenergy.org/Energy/Election/2020_Election_Cases.htm


Moontrane

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5841
  • a Harris administration, together with Joe Biden
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #363 on: June 19, 2021, 04:20:09 PM »
This is actually an appreciated great response. Two things though. We (I) know that “defund the police” does mean (in most cases) means re-allocation which is basically the same thing as defunding simply because certain funding is taken away from certain departments leaving those departments vulnerable. Of course departments should review yearly budgets but some of these budget cuts call to dissolve certain departments. LAPD cut their budget by $150mil doing away with their gang units. Sad

It was signed into law yesterday and NRA backed, that Texas is now a constitutional carry states as covered in the Second Amendment. You mentioned required training. I agree with this but not everyone can afford formal firearms training for those who can’t afford it, law abiding citizens still have the constitutional right to protect themselves, families and businesses. HOWEVER, basic knowing your firearm and the at the very least, they should know the four basic rules of handling a firearm and the laws and rules of the Castle Doctrine/Stand your ground laws and yes, I’m also talking about in the now 30-32 constitutional carry states and you’re right, in states like Texas the 2A is revered but still not out of the woods. You have reps like Shiela Jackson Lee trying to introduce HR 127 plus about another 15-16 “gun control” bills in the pipeline. This wouldn’t really have been an issue before but now the left control all three branches and the only one standing the way (thank God) is Joe Manchin.

On this note, Biden nominated a gun-control advocate to head the ATF who sits on many gun-control groups that’s only intention is ultimately gun confiscation.  His name is David Chipman

In blue states the second Amendment is extremely in danger because we have anti-2A advocates within that states government. Certain firearms have to be “California compliant” or it’s a possible felony. Max 10 round mags..why? It’s my constitutional right and the list goes on.

On the issue of more training for cops. I know how they train, drills, etc that being said, they are trained but the problem isn’t more training, the problem is THEY DON’T train but only when it’s mandatory which isn’t much. Most agencies here have to requalify once a year with their duty weapon for about an hour and when something happens a lot wind up getting injured or killed...why? Because they don’t train at least on their own so they either panic and shoot or get shot. I’ve mentioned this before. Only 36% of shots fired from 10ft actually hit their target.

Perishable skills.

Officers come out of the academy ready to take on the bad guys, but they need to maintain – if not improve – their new skills.

Sparring and rolling on the mat a few times a month for starters; active/dynamic firearms training several times a year. 

Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40625
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #364 on: June 19, 2021, 05:27:06 PM »
dude.. same link as posted before in this thread

http://wiseenergy.org/Energy/Election/2020_Election_Cases.htm

Thanks. I was too lazy to look back through the thread.

What I find interesting is about half of these cases were filed prior to the election.

Coach is Back!

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 59463
  • It’s All Bullshit
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #365 on: June 19, 2021, 06:54:17 PM »
Perishable skills.

Officers come out of the academy ready to take on the bad guys, but they need to maintain – if not improve – their new skills.

Sparring and rolling on the mat a few times a month for starters; active/dynamic firearms training several times a year.

And this was pretty much my point. I have quite a few friends that are still cops, one that just retired, another that just retired as a SWAT commander and one of my Instructors retired about about the same time as my SWAT friend as a SWAT instructor. Most of our Law Enforcement don't keep up their training (tactical) and treat their job as any 9-5. That being said when something happens (and I'm by no means speaking for everyone) they panic and don't do what they've been taught...situational awareness is out the window and they wind up getting hurt, killed or putting their partners or bystanders in harms way. Why? because they haven't been training and most if the time it's was simple as that. At the very least they should be training tactical live fire AT LEAST twice a month with sims in between those times.

For that, PD budgets shouldn't have to be increased that much but rather give allowances for them to train on their own at approved tactical firearms training facilities but the training has to be MANDATORY. The average cop, if put into a CQB situation before SWAT arrives, most cannot effectively do this.

Marvin Martian

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1896
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #366 on: June 19, 2021, 08:49:47 PM »
The reality is police need INCREASED funding. We need to attract the best and brightest and pay well - but most importantly there should be DRAMATICALLY increased training. Cops should spend 30% of their work time training. That’s aside from the fact that every cop should be fired immediatley is they carry the bodyfat of a Shizz type. Quarterly PT test administered - too much to list. But that is the answer IMO

Coach is Back!

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 59463
  • It’s All Bullshit
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #367 on: June 19, 2021, 09:01:52 PM »
The reality is police need INCREASED funding. We need to attract the best and brightest and pay well - but most importantly there should be DRAMATICALLY increased training. Cops should spend 30% of their work time training. That’s aside from the fact that every cop should be fired immediatley is they carry the bodyfat of a Shizz type. Quarterly PT test administered - too much to list. But that is the answer IMO

This is real and good for them. I forgot which PD it is but they’re required all applicants to be Blue belts in BJJ before hire then maintain it.


Moontrane

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5841
  • a Harris administration, together with Joe Biden
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #368 on: June 19, 2021, 09:16:46 PM »
This is real and good for them. I forgot which PD it is but they’re required all applicants to be Blue belts in BJJ before hire then maintain it.

Michigan for the win!

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #369 on: June 19, 2021, 09:58:11 PM »
The above was discussion worth reading.

We all lift, drink bourbon, etc...should be more like that.

/No homo


agree

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #370 on: June 19, 2021, 10:06:14 PM »
This is real and good for them. I forgot which PD it is but they’re required all applicants to be Blue belts in BJJ before hire then maintain it.

I can only speak from my experience but being a blue belt in BJJ is a neat and useful thing. But in my experience it has it's limitations. Most of the physical encounters I was involved in were explosive, and dynamic. Rarely 1 person. I visualize applying an arm bar on the ground while his buddies are circling me and it just wouldn't work. So while  I certainly encourage applicants who have a background in BJJ..... to eliminate all other applicants in my opinion is shooting yourself in the foot. A golden gloves boxer wouldn't qualify, an army Special Forces veteran wouldn't necessary qualify.. Black belt in Judo...you see where I'm going. Outside of a newspaper article where it sounds cool, it's not a very logical criteria   

Moontrane

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5841
  • a Harris administration, together with Joe Biden
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #371 on: June 20, 2021, 01:36:06 AM »
I can only speak from my experience but being a blue belt in BJJ is a neat and useful thing. But in my experience it has it's limitations. Most of the physical encounters I was involved in were explosive, and dynamic. Rarely 1 person. I visualize applying an arm bar on the ground while his buddies are circling me and it just wouldn't work. So while  I certainly encourage applicants who have a background in BJJ..... to eliminate all other applicants in my opinion is shooting yourself in the foot. A golden gloves boxer wouldn't qualify, an army Special Forces veteran wouldn't necessary qualify.. Black belt in Judo...you see where I'm going. Outside of a newspaper article where it sounds cool, it's not a very logical criteria

Right, BJJ works against single opponents.  More than one means you need mobility.

When there are several officers trying to subdue an unarmed perp (too many recorded examples), and none has BJJ training, brute force in numbers is the default approach.

If just one of the responding officers has BJJ training and applies it, that perp is gonna cry uncle and submit to handcuffs seconds after an ankle lock, arm lock, knee-bar, etc. 

Similar with a one-on-one encounter, but the officer has to then rely on the perp’s honesty about agreeing to be handcuffed. 

Michigan’s proposed legislation seems unlikely to pass, but I think it’s a really good idea.


Primemuscle

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 40625
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #373 on: June 20, 2021, 02:59:38 PM »
Sometimes the authorities do screw up. In 2019, a disabled woman, Jennifer Gayman from Brookings, OR in was headed home in the evening on her mobility scooter when she was cited for not wearing a helmet and riding the scooter on a sidewalk and crosswalk. She tried to explain to the two policemen that she was indeed not breaking the law.

The cops spent 14 minutes writing the $25 citation Then they told her that unless she secured a helmet, she could not ride the scooter home. She was about to abandon her mobility scooter so she scooted off down the sidewalk towards home. The cops followed her home, at 15 mph, siren and lights on. They called for backup, then arrested her on her doorstep for “attempting to elude a police officer.”

It gets worse. She was found guilty in May 2019  by a nonunanimous (11-1) jury verdict and ordered to pay a $500 fine and spend five nights in jail. She appealed. On June 9, the appeals court overturned the felony conviction of Jennifer Gayman, the disabled “fugitive” in the most famous low-speed police chase in Oregon history.

https://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/2021/06/malicious-prosecution-steve-duin-column.html

Moontrane

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5841
  • a Harris administration, together with Joe Biden
Re: Why would the Dems send a 100 lawyers to AZ to stop an audit?
« Reply #374 on: June 20, 2021, 08:44:20 PM »
Sometimes the authorities do screw up. In 2019, a disabled woman, Jennifer Gayman from Brookings, OR in was headed home in the evening on her mobility scooter when she was cited for not wearing a helmet and riding the scooter on a sidewalk and crosswalk. She tried to explain to the two policemen that she was indeed not breaking the law.

The cops spent 14 minutes writing the $25 citation Then they told her that unless she secured a helmet, she could not ride the scooter home. She was about to abandon her mobility scooter so she scooted off down the sidewalk towards home. The cops followed her home, at 15 mph, siren and lights on. They called for backup, then arrested her on her doorstep for “attempting to elude a police officer.”

It gets worse. She was found guilty in May 2019  by a nonunanimous (11-1) jury verdict and ordered to pay a $500 fine and spend five nights in jail. She appealed. On June 9, the appeals court overturned the felony conviction of Jennifer Gayman, the disabled “fugitive” in the most famous low-speed police chase in Oregon history.

https://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/2021/06/malicious-prosecution-steve-duin-column.html

What an effed up story.  That AG has another three years to do more stupid stuff.