peacefuljeffrey

then PM me and I'll forward you what I just got from one of our friends here... showing her true nature, and giving ultimate lie to the "compassion" of the Left. We already knew that they are into diversity, compassion, the value of the individual, and free speech until you disagree with them. I have the proof that it's all a big fraud. (And you'd think that someone with this person's username would know how to be "big" about discussions like we've been having...) - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Florida was 1987. And STILL when a state considers right-to-carry legislation, despite the FACTUAL, REAL-WORLD PRACTICAL DEBUNKING that the "blood-running-in-the-streets" predictions have suffered, the anti-self-defense Left always trots out the same, tired, utterly inane and invalid worries... and the media parrot them right down to the public with editorials that indicate 19 years of the ability to protect ourselves with staggeringly few "CCW criminals" have taught them absolutely nothing. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

You really tickle yourself with this inane "reich wing" pun, don't you? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Why are you worried about other people's alleged threats against you when you are already obviously suicidal? You "know" that martial law is coming... and if it does, you plan to blow your brains out. What difference does it make, then, for others to threaten you? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Not to mention the fact that it completely trivializes what the actual Nazis actually did. But that won't matter to those who don't actually care about insulting the memory of 6 million Jews, and others, who were murdered. The fake compassion of the Left is immediately shed when there are insult points to be scored. They take such glee in petty barbs. - So lets all stop this crap of calling people Nazi's unless you want to be called murderers and Anti Semites and Communists... IS THAT FAIR ENOUGH FOR YOU? edited to be nice ok? -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Better join up now Jeffrey.... you want to get in on the ground floor for the martial law that will be here in no time.. oh yeah thats right.. you are peacefull... BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH can you say OXYmoron By the way when we meet I have a cheap beer for you.. You do plenty of justice to the obvious truth that liberals are not, in fact, the easygoing humanity-lovers they try to pretend they are. There is no compassion in you. I sense such ill-will from you it's not even funny. What made you so bitter, I do not know, but it's clear that you are. I suspect that it's probably a very good thing that it will be easy to spot you and avoid you should we ever be around the same DZ... Oh, and what are you going to do when the martial law that you swear is coming "in no time" does not arrive? Will you be like those whackos with the sandwich boards that predict a specific date for the world to end, and when it doesn't, they just make a new sign with a later date? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Serious ethical and possible legal breach if she does it without the instructor's consent. No different than recording a concert without consent. I think that's only about telephone conversations where one party is not informed that the other is recording. You don't have a presumption of privacy in "public." You can't stop people from taking your photograph, why should you be able to stop them from recording the things you say? If there is a university policy against recording, that's different, but still would not carry the force of law. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Wow kewl... mysogeny.... Um, "misogyny"? ...Maybe you need to hang out with more women. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Yea, and it's really great to have a balanced moderate like you on the forum to do the job . . . High-fuckin'-five! - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

The GI's VOLUNTEERED to jump out of planes in WW II I did the same 30 some odd years later. Far different from your analogy. How is it that something so easily passes right over the head of one so tall? Of course my analogy was way off. It was to illustrate how off YOUR comparison was, between this kid complaining about the teacher and kids being obligated to do the same under Hitler. Geeeez... I guess it's just time for me to stop tryin', with you. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Explain to me how this was prevented by the confiscation of a few hundred thousand guns from people who were never gonna use them in a crime? And before you say, "How do we know that not one of those vetted, law-abiding gun owners was ever gonna use his gun in a crime?" I want to remind you that the same logic might be applied to what you might do with your automobile, or chainsaw, or kitchen knives, and could thus be used as a warrant for their confiscation without compensation. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Was it you who posted that the purpose of this legislation was to stem the overwhelming tide of appx. 300 guns a year from lawful hands to illegal owners? Despite the fact that estimates put the number of illegal firearms in England at between 1,000,000 and 3,000,000? So that was worth taking them away from law-abiding owners with no compensation, huh? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

It was in The Palm Beach fuckin' Post, man! In print, in my hand. I didn't have to hunt for it, and I linked to the BBC only because I didn't clip the article to re-type on my computer. Besides, the article in the paper was just a short blurb. More details in the one I linked you to. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

But what of the fact that there are instances where shooting an unarmed person IS justified? Something called "disparity of force," such as one person with a gun surrounded by five angry guys who are talking about smashing his skull... Or one woman with a gun surrounded by two or three guys talking about how much fun it's gonna be to rape her... If it's justified, the shooter should be found "not guilty" by a jury of his/her peers. If it's justified, the shooter should not even have to stand trial. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Again we see the limit of your understanding. The law already forbids shooting someone who is not an immediate lethal threat. Please explain why another law saying the same thing is needed. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

If he is like 50 feet away, he is still a threat to you if he has the intention. It is just not an inmediate threat. Yeah, well, you are not allowed to shoot someone who is not an immediate threat! And even if you shoot for his arm, you just used "deadly physical force." It's not defined after-the-fact as "did he die from the force, or not?" It's defined as "this level of force could reasonably cause death if used." You seem to be out of your depth, here. Are you kidding? That is exactly why you cannot go and shoot someone right after they say, "I'm gonna go home and possibly come back here with my axe and cut your head off." If you shoot that guy, you'll go up for manslaughter. You'd have to be facing the actual threat of that axe, and not from 50 feet away, either. You really don't know what you're talking about in this instance, if what you said above is what you truly believe. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

I disagree, I thought I had made that obvious in earlier posts. You did. He's just screening out the parts that are too hard for him to rebut. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

When skilled lecturers do that, it usually is quite clear they are being a "devil's advocate" in order to jump-start thinking and debate. Quite different from a guy who actually IS stating his actual opinion. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Why would a student voluntarily recording the teacher remind you of what fascists required anyone to do in 1930s Germany? Could you maybe be making this parallel out of your desire to think this is a fascist issue? I think it's obvious that she was reminded of it by the fact that the student reported on what was being taught. The recording part was secondary. Yes, well, he did neither the reporting nor the recording out of an obligation to a totalitarian regime; and it speaks volumes against Amazon's argument that he was the ONLY one who came forward to complain about the teacher's breaking of the clear rules that govern teachers in this school. If you have a problem with the rule itself, let's hear it and discuss it. It is an objective truth that the teacher broke that rule that is supposed to be in effect in the classroom. Why anyone thinks that when one student who happened to be recording as a matter of normal course comes forward to complain about a legitimate breaking of a rule by a teacher it is indicative of a sea-change toward Hitler's Youth, I have no fucking idea. So it's okay if he gets a marxist instructor who fails him for presenting non-marxist opinions, huh? Now that this story is also on MSNBC.com, will you be continuing to make it an issue that Foxnews covered it? Will a marxist instructor be impressed by MSNBC? Or will it be requiring CBSnews.com to impress a marxist shithead? Really, man, how long are you folks gonna keep harping on, "It was a Foxnews story"? It's an AP story. And continual mention of it being carried by Foxnews ("and therefore it must have conservative bias") is just fucking inane. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Um, holy shit. Are you really saying that in a classroom setting, in a free "democracy" (do you really still fall under the misconception that the U.S. is built to be a "democracy"?) any time the virtues of freedom and democracy are taught to students, we have to give equal time to the teaching of the virtues of fascism and totalitarianism?! What the fuck, dude?! He's been suspended. I have not heard that he's been fired. And does he have a right to voice his opinion without giving the other side, in an issue that doesn't relate to the subject he is paid to teach, even despite there being a clear rule in the district about giving alternate viewpoints? He's entitled to break that rule just because he's entitled to his opinion? No one ever said he was not entitled to have an opinion. Do you have a right to disturb moviegoers by standing up during a screening and starting to rant about your political opinions? No. But that doesn't mean that those who escort you out of the theater tried to take away your right to an opinion. I really wonder if you understand this. So far, it does not seem so. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Again with the "Nazis required him to report on the teacher" crap. Funny, if that's how you look at it, 99% of the class did not go along with the Reichstag's rules. You should be quite pleased with that success rate. And, um, where was the "other side" to what the teacher was spewing? You just said students should be given all sides. Did this teacher do that? No? Is there a school district rule that says he has to? Yes? Good. Fine. He's suspended for breaking a rule. Or should we let him off out of sympathy for the fact that liberals are sinking fast in this country and must be despondent, and set an example for the students that rule-breaking has no consequences? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Weren't siglines with political messages prohibited? Or was that rule scaled back? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

A student.... one... who recorded him because the teacher does not suscribe to his particular viewpoint. I listened to the student this morning on Fox News.. Kinda reminded me of how the students were required to report on thier teachers in 1930's Germany.. Why would a student voluntarily recording the teacher remind you of what fascists required anyone to do in 1930s Germany? Could you maybe be making this parallel out of your desire to think this is a fascist issue? Your going skydiving kinda reminds me of how paratroopers in WWII were required to jump out of planes into enemy territory to fight or die for victory... In fact, there is very little difference between your skydiving and, say, forced sterilization in China. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

CNN.com's poll right now says, "Who is most to blame for the failed response to Hurricane Katrina?: - Michael Brown - Michael Chertoff" Um, doesn't that poll leave a BIT to be desired? It's like, "So, when did you stop beating your wife?" It forces you to have to say that one of those two is "most responsible for the failed response to Hurricane Katrina," when in fact there may have been other things far more responsible; some possibilities are the failure of citizens to get themselves out of harm's way when they had ample notice that a powerful hurricane was inbound; failure of police to stand their posts; failure of citizens to behave in a lawful and orderly fashion; failure of Clinton's budget cuts, which impaired the safety of the levees... But no, the poll offers a narrow choice between two scapegoats. What if the poll were, "Which do you hate more, receiving oral sex or fucking?" If you answer, you're saying you "hate" both of them, but hate one less than the other. CNN's polls are the biggest pieces of shit on the internet. They pull this shit over and over. I know they are not meant in any way, shape or form to be scientific, valid polls, but at this point they are not even worth entertainment value. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Why don't you tell that to JohnnyD, who is arguing the exact opposite -- that it was because his opinion was anti-Bush/anti-U.S. that he was suspended. He violated an objective policy, as you said. He should suffer whatever proscribed punishment the school district has in place for that. JohnnyD would rather make accusations that he can't prove, that we are only after this teacher because his opinions don't gibe with our own. A fine thing, calling people liars like that. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"