USA riots

[marks]

Why not then take all the guns away when a school massacre occurs?

Um . . . let's just try to get the guns away from criminals.

Those who misuse their freedom to victimize others don't deserve it.

 

[marks]

You are advocating tyranny when you equate the actions of lawful citizens exercising their rights with criminals.

No. Again you put words in my mouth. You are so intent on defending BLM's honor that you will refuse to acknowledge the bad acts that they do. And so long as you continue down that road, these kinds of non-sequitors are all you'll have available.

Advocating tyranny? Of course not! Naturally, "lawful citizens" aren't "criminals".

Lawful citizens aren't protesters one moments, and arsonists, thieves, murderers, and vandals the next.

Let's take vandalism. Defacement of someone else's property. Did you happen to notice any of that from your "peaceful protesters"? I cannot imagine that you could deny that! Let's start there. Honest answer?

 

[bukka]

Let's be real clear here. Your view is that BLM people had nothing to do with riots, burglaries, arson, and vandalism? This is your claim?

Do you believe, marks, gun owners are all guilty and responsible for school massacres and crimes using firearms? No. Likewise, I do not believe that the BLM is responsible for riots, burglaries, arson and vandalism, in the act of their constitutionally protect right to assemble to protest and seek redress of grievances. If you want to equate civil rights with criminality, come out and say it!

Why not consider the Golden Rule for a change? This is the moral basis for the right of assembly specifically, and for the Bill of Rights, generally. Let us follow Christ and love others as we wish ourselves to be loved. The Golden Rule establishes equity in law.

 

[bukka]

Um . . . let's just try to get the guns away from criminals.

Those who misuse their freedom to victimize others don't deserve it.

Don't, marks, confuse rioters with lawful citizens.

Why not consider the Golden Rule for a change? This is the moral basis for the right of assembly specifically, and for the Bill of Rights, generally. Let us follow Christ and love others as we wish ourselves to be loved. The Golden Rule establishes equity in law.

 

[marks]

Why not consider the Golden Rule for a change?

OK. Let's go for maximum bang for buck. Let's try to save the most lives at risk that we can. Will you join me in protesting BLM for their advocacy of baby murder? Will you join me in protesting their desire to destroy the lives of our nations youth by advocating their sexual and gender deviancy? Will you join me in protesting their hypocritical and racist declarations?

They have the right to protest what they want, will you join me in protesting against them?

 

[marks]

Likewise, I do not believe that the BLM is responsible for riots, burglaries, arson and vandalism,

Then I think you are naive, or disengenuous.

 

[marks]

Why not consider the Golden Rule for a change? This is the moral basis for the right of assembly specifically, and for the Bill of Rights, generally. Let us follow Christ and love others as we wish ourselves to be loved. The Golden Rule establishes equity in law.

Yeah, I read this part already.

I guess you're running low on rhetoric.

 

[bukka]

No. Again you put words in my mouth. You are so intent on defending BLM's honor that you will refuse to acknowledge the bad acts that they do. And so long as you continue down that road, these kinds of non-sequitors are all you'll have available.

Advocating tyranny? Of course not! Naturally, "lawful citizens" aren't "criminals".

Lawful citizens aren't protesters one moments, and arsonists, thieves, murderers, and vandals the next.

Let's take vandalism. Defacement of someone else's property. Did you happen to notice any of that from your "peaceful protesters"? I cannot imagine that you could deny that! Let's start there. Honest answer?

OK. Let's go for maximum bang for buck. Let's try to save the most lives at risk that we can. Will you join me in protesting BLM for their advocacy of baby murder? Will you join me in protesting their desire to destroy the lives of our nations youth by advocating their sexual and gender deviancy? Will you join me in protesting their hypocritical and racist declarations?

They have the right to protest what they want, will you join me in protesting against them?

Then I think you are naive, or disengenuous.

I see that you don't accept the right of lawful citizens to their right of assembly to seek redress for grievances, in your persistent attempt to equate lawful citizens with criminals. Now if you want to exercise your right of assembly to protest the BLM for any of its beliefs, you have that right. Why should you ask me that, unless you tie civil rights to a political party or religious beliefs.

Why don't you accept the Bill of Rights? Apparently, you're very hostile about them.

Again, why not consider the Golden Rule for a change? This is the moral basis for the right of assembly specifically, and for the Bill of Rights, generally. Let us follow Christ and love others as we wish ourselves to be loved. The Golden Rule establishes equity in law.

 

[marks]

I see that you don't accept the right of lawful citizens to their right of assembly to seek redress for grievances, in your persistent attempt to equate lawful citizens with criminals.

Nonsense! More words in my mouth. And they don't even make sense. You really don't have much of an argument, do you?

I guess this just comes down to your denial of protester participation in the arson, murders, vandalism, and thievery. Eye witness reports don't agree with you.

 

[marks]

Now if you want to exercise your right of assembly to protest the BLM for any of its beliefs, you have that right. Why should you ask me that, unless you tie civil rights to a political party or religious beliefs.

Why? Let's make it real. Let's stop whitewashing.

 

[bukka]

Nonsense! More words in my mouth. And they don't even make sense. You really don't have much of an argument, do you?

I guess this just comes down to your denial of protester participation in the arson, murders, vandalism, and thievery. Eye witness reports don't agree with you.

Why? Let's make it real. Let's stop whitewashing.

You're still defaming lawful citizens, marks, equating them with the criminals that have infiltrated their assemblies. Do you hold all gun owners responsible for the criminals that infiltrate their ranks to possess and use firearms to commit crimes such as robbery or murder? Why can't you be morally consistent? Again, the logical conclusion of your arguments so far, is that you want to take away the Bill of Rights from Americans.

Again, why not consider the Golden Rule for a change? This is the moral basis for the right of assembly specifically, and for the Bill of Rights, generally. Let us follow Christ and love others as we wish ourselves to be loved. The Golden Rule establishes equity in law.

 

[Enoch111]

I see that you don't accept the right of lawful citizens to their right of assembly to seek redress for grievances, in your persistent attempt to equate lawful citizens with criminals.

Bukka, stop promoting and perpetuating myths. Rioting and vandalism are NOT in any way, shape, or form the equivalent of lawful assembly to seek redress. And while were on the subject of myths, what exactly have the black politicians been doing FOR DECADES to address the grievances of their black constituents? Absolutely nothing.

Take the example of wicked Maxine Waters. Every time she opens her mouth, she speaks wickedly and maliciously. But what exactly has she done with her privileged position?
Maxine Waters Admits 'We Don't Want' Businesses To Reopen
Maxine Waters has a habit of blurting out the truth Democrats try to hide. The Los Angeles Democrat was never shy about calling for President Donald Trump to be impeached, she openly advocated public harassment of Trump cabinet officials, and now she’s letting the word out about how liberals really feel about the country’s reaction to the coronavirus...In short, she doesn’t want independent businesses to get back on their feet — and she has nothing but scorn for fellow Americans protesting their states’ decisions to keep them closed... And she essentially outlined a government takeover of the economy while she was at it.
Dem Rep. Maxine Waters Shames Protesters, Says 'We Don't Want' Businesses To Open

In other words, this black woman specializes in hating Trump and his administration, and hating businesses which are the lifeblood of the economy. But what exactly has she done for her constituents with her racist hatred?

 

[bukka]

Bukka, stop promoting and perpetuating myths. Rioting and vandalism are NOT in any way, shape, or form the equivalent of lawful assembly to seek redress. And while were on the subject of myths, what exactly have the black politicians been doing FOR DECADES to address the grievances of their black constituents? Absolutely nothing.

Take the example of wicked Maxine Waters. Every time she opens her mouth, she speaks wickedly and maliciously. But what exactly has she done with her privileged position?
Maxine Waters Admits 'We Don't Want' Businesses To Reopen
Maxine Waters has a habit of blurting out the truth Democrats try to hide. The Los Angeles Democrat was never shy about calling for President Donald Trump to be impeached, she openly advocated public harassment of Trump cabinet officials, and now she’s letting the word out about how liberals really feel about the country’s reaction to the coronavirus...In short, she doesn’t want independent businesses to get back on their feet — and she has nothing but scorn for fellow Americans protesting their states’ decisions to keep them closed... And she essentially outlined a government takeover of the economy while she was at it.
Dem Rep. Maxine Waters Shames Protesters, Says 'We Don't Want' Businesses To Open

In other words, this black woman specializes in hating Trump and his administration, and hating businesses which are the lifeblood of the economy. But what exactly as she done for her constituents with her racist hatred?

Enoch111, the right to assembly to seek redress for grievances is written in the constitution. I think that if you're rejecting the Bill of Rights, come out and say it. If freedom of the press and religion is not important to you, say it. If the right to bear arms is not important to you, say it! Quit defaming the character of the protesters and blaming them for the outsiders that infiltrate their ranks to riot and to engage in other lawless acts. If criminals use guns to commit crimes does that mean that the right to bear arms is a right to be rejected? Come on! Be consistent in your argument. If rioting occurs during a right of assembly, does that mean you want to ban assemblies? Does that mean banning arms and the right to bear them? Come on! Be consistent!

Quit defaming BLM making them out to be criminals. Do you want the average gun owner, not a criminal, to be regarded as a criminal when they are exercising their constitutional right. Be consistent! If you want the average gun owner held responsible for school massacres, say it! Be consistent!

The great mass of your posting starting with Maxine Waters has nothing to do with the OP.

Why not consider the Golden Rule for a change? This is the moral basis for the right of assembly specifically, and for the Bill of Rights, generally. Let us follow Christ and love others as we love ourselves. That establishes equity in law.

 

[marks]

You're still defaming lawful citizens, marks, equating them with the criminals that have infiltrated their assemblies. Do you hold all gun owners responsible for the criminals that infiltrate their ranks to possess and use firearms to commit crimes such as robbery or murder? Why can't you be morally consistent? Again, the logical conclusion of your arguments so far, is that you want to take away the Bill of Rights from Americans.

Again, why not consider the Golden Rule for a change? This is the moral basis for the right of assembly specifically, and for the Bill of Rights, generally. Let us follow Christ and love others as we wish ourselves to be loved. The Golden Rule establishes equity in law.

Bukka, I'm wondering, considering how many times you've misstated my position, can you actually restate my position correctly?

 

[marks]

Quit defaming BLM making them out to be criminals.

They do that all on their own.

 

[bukka]

Bukka, I'm wondering, considering how many times you've misstated my position, can you actually restate my position correctly?

I'm only being logical, marks. I'm taking what you're saying to it's logical conclusion. You're still defaming lawful citizens equating them with the criminals that have infiltrated their assemblies. Do you hold all gun owners responsible for the criminals that infiltrate their ranks to possess and use firearms to commit crimes such as robbery or murder? I'm being very logical here. I continue to ask, why you can't be morally consistent? Again, the logical conclusion of your arguments so far, is that you want to take away the Bill of Rights from Americans.

Are you angry that the Bill of Rights are in the hands of a race different from yourself? I have to wonder that.

Again, why not consider the Golden Rule for a change? This is the moral basis for the right of assembly specifically, and for the Bill of Rights, generally. Let us follow Christ and love others as we wish ourselves to be loved. The Golden Rule establishes equity in law.

 

[bukka]

They do that all on their own.

Do you resent the people you dislike having civil rights?

Again, why not consider the Golden Rule for a change? This is the moral basis for the right of assembly specifically, and for the Bill of Rights, generally. Let us follow Christ and love others as we wish ourselves to be loved. The Golden Rule establishes equity in law.

 

[marks]

You're still defaming lawful citizens, marks, equating them with the criminals that have infiltrated their assemblies. Do you hold all gun owners responsible for the criminals that infiltrate their ranks to possess and use firearms to commit crimes such as robbery or murder? Why can't you be morally consistent? Again, the logical conclusion of your arguments so far, is that you want to take away the Bill of Rights from Americans.

To simply keep repeating the same empty accusations, that's the same tactic used by groups such as BLM that relies more on indoctrination and emotional hype then on reality.

You appear to have the notion that none of the protesters participated in rioting. And that's probably the hardest sell of all right now!

Moral consistency.

BLM claims to value black lives, but promotes the taking of those lives. BLM claims to want justice while turning a blind eye to the injustice that is in front of it's face.

The golden rule. Do you value the golden rule? Can you join me in declaring that BLM, while sharing the same rights of peaceful protest that we all have, even so, is hypocritical, disengenuous, funded by those who want to use it to attach US society, supports murder of babies, and advocates gender confusion and sexual deviancy?

Shall we walk together in truth?

 

[Renniks]

So marks and Rennik, you believe criminals over lawful citizens exercising their rights under the constitution. Why not then take all the guns away when a school massacre occurs? Why not take free speech, assembly and religion away if the exercise of those infuriate a President wanting loyalty to him over any existing law?

You are advocating tyranny when you equate the actions of lawful citizens exercising their rights with criminals. If you can do that, you can take away the Bill of Rights from all Americans.

You two have not made your case. Are you now going to advocate to take away the guns of all Americans because of school massacres? Do you not realize that at a certain point inconsistency turns into hypocrisy? Think about it.

Why not consider the Golden Rule for a change? This is the moral basis for the right of assembly specifically, and for the Bill of Rights, generally. Let us follow Christ and love others as we love ourselves. That establishes equity in law.

One big strawman. I believe every person who committed any unlawful action while supposedly supporting BLM should be charged. Why would I want lawful protesters charged?

 

[marks]

I'm taking what you're saying to it's logical conclusion.

Rather to a conclusion that looks good to you in your post.

I'm saying some of those assembled to protest also committed, and facilitated crimes, such as arson, murder, theft, and vandalism. Not to mention to generally terrify perfectly innocent people by becoming needlessly aggressive to others who were attempting to mind their own business.

Are you angry that the Bill of Rights are in the hands of a race different from yourself?

What are you even talking about here??

I'm being very logical here.

No, you are whitewashing your pet group. And I'm not buying it.