
Chandemonium
Community Member-
Posts
1,275 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by Chandemonium
-
The Media's Portrayal of Trump and His Presidency
Chandemonium replied to Nanker's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
At least she didn’t go with “Pence punches disabled war hero” -
What is better, no guns, or more guns?
Chandemonium replied to Security's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Cool. While we’re leaving our personal safety up to God, let’s also get rid of home security alarm systems, front doors that lock, smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, seat belts, air bags, bike helmets, and modern medicine. -
That’s what I said. The law should allow them to miss work to protest if they want. The law should also allow them to be fired for missing work to protest.
-
I don’t see why it shouldn’t be legal. I also don’t see why it shouldn’t be legal to fire their asses for it.
-
What is better, no guns, or more guns?
Chandemonium replied to Security's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Or he was lying to push a narrative, and/or is the world’s biggest sissy. .223 is arguably the easiest centerfire rifle round to shoot as far as being approachable to new shooters (low noise, low recoil, low cost, availability at least in normal times etc.) that’s what makes it so popular. -
The guy in the bottom picture has a nicer office chair than I do at my desk at work. Must be his white privelege.
-
The Michigan protests are an interesting parallel. Even before George Floyd was killed some leftist Facebook friends of mine were posting CNN links to stories about them and captioning them with things like ‘imagine if they were black,’ with the implication that they would’ve been murdered by the police simply for being armed in public, or at least forcefully dispersed by riot squads. They scoffed at the notion that perhaps the reason they weren’t forcefully dispersed wasn’t due to their skin color, but rather because they clearly possessed the means to shoot back. It looks like they now have their answer to the ‘what if they were black?’ question. I wonder if they will reassess their position in light of this evidence, but I’m not holding my breath.
-
“Cancel” / Knee-Jerk Culture of 2020 and beyond
Chandemonium replied to RiotAct's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
So uterus is too gendered to use, but we’re supposed to call menstrual periods uterine bleeding? Makes perfect sense. Couldn’t even get to the bottom of their own list before they out-woke themselves. -
What is better, no guns, or more guns?
Chandemonium replied to Security's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Any 10mm fans here? Been thinking about picking one (or 2) up as a hunting sidearm. -
Was Warren actually banned for starting this thread? He hasn’t posted since.
-
“Cancel” / Knee-Jerk Culture of 2020 and beyond
Chandemonium replied to RiotAct's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Dr. Who did try to warn us about the Weeping Angels. -
If the protesters want to say all cops are bad because the truly bad ones aren’t immediately identified and weeded out, the same standard should apply to them. #allprotestersarerioters
-
2020 Election is officially Trump vs Biden
Chandemonium replied to transplantbillsfan's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Good point. No one’s ever had their information stolen off the internet and used against them before. -
CHAZ Seattle Observations
Chandemonium replied to RocCityRoller's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Ol’ Raz ain’t getting much sympathy in the replies to his tweet. It’s too bad. My experience with Seattle consists of a 4 day stay 12 years ago so I’m hardly an expert, but at the time it seemed like a really cool city. -
Trump's Tulsa Rally: America Strikes Back
Chandemonium replied to Big Blitz's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
You’re right about one thing. Creepy Joe will definitely try to unit the country if he wins. If he does, we’ll all be ****ed. -
The Mizzou/Yale/PC/Free Speech Topic
Chandemonium replied to FireChan's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Only if your name is Lou. You definitely don’t want to be accused of being booger Lou these days. -
Blatant racism aside, I can’t get over the fact that he comes here crapping all over Trump and Trump supporters as his shtick, then comes out and admits that He thinks you’d have to be stupid to vote for Biden.
-
Trump's Tulsa Rally: America Strikes Back
Chandemonium replied to Big Blitz's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Why are they trying to cancel Taco Bell? -
The Media's Portrayal of Trump and His Presidency
Chandemonium replied to Nanker's topic in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
I disagree. I thought the last half of the full video was lovely. Glad the POS got his. -
I think it’s a bold assumption to make that the boyfriend wouldn’t have opened fire if the police didn’t have guns. I’m not even sure he knew they had guns or if their guns were drawn when he opened fire. If you kick someone’s door in uninvited at 1am that action alone is enough for many people to believe you mean to do them grave harm and that deadly force is justified whether you as the burglar are armed or not, and there’s many jurisdictions in this country where the law agrees that deadly force is justified. I’m not sure what not wanting to murder police has to do with this case, since the reason the charges against the boyfriend were dropped and the reason I personally believe his actions are justified is precisely because he didn’t know they were police serving a warrant, so he treated them as the home invaders they appeared to be. From the cops’ side, I certainly believe deescalation has its time and place, and should be taught to recruits and reinforced through career-long continuing education, but when you’re taking gunfire isn’t the time for “how can I help you?” At that point they need to address the deadly threat they’re facing in the way that ends it the quickest, which means shooting back.
-
If you’re suggesting that police shouldn’t carry guns when entering strange homes with suspected drug activity, I can’t agree there. They also didn’t fire at the first moving target they saw, Ms. Taylor’s boyfriend shot first and the police returned fire, which is why I said in my first post that given the circumstances I believe both Ms. Taylor’s boyfriend and the officers appear justified in their actions, tragic though the result is. My issue is the policy which allowed these circumstances to begin with.
-
To your first paragraph, while that may be the case, the risk of police getting shot through the door needs to be weighed against the risk inherent in a no-knock of a gunfight with an invidual who would otherwise not react violently if he did not believe his home was being broken into. Alternative tactics that minimize the risks of both being shot through the door or starting a shootout with someone who believes their home is being broken into by criminals, while still allowing the police to apprehend suspects and collect evidence should also be explored and considered. As far as if policy was subverted in this particular case, I have seen mention of some peculiarities in how the warrant was obtained, but not enough for me to make the jump to believing intentional malfeasance without additional evidence. From what I understand, the warrant was based at least in part on Taylor’s ex-boyfriend, a suspected drug dealer, having had packages delivered to her address in his name. This was supposedly based on a tip from a postal worker, but since the incident no such person has confirmed that they were the informant. This seems odd to me, but even if it’s all true it seems like far to low of a standard to obtain a no knock warrant.