lazarus1983
Posts: 828
Joined: 2/25/2006 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro quote:
ORIGINAL: lazarus1983 So you're looking at the situation as given. And what I'm saying is that what if there were aspects of the story left out that make the resulting actions of Circuit City and the policeman proper? Yeah, I'm not coming up with any reasons as to why a policeman should ignore both his own state's statutes and/or a person's Constitutional rights. quote:
ORIGINAL: lazarus1983 For all we know, he DID steal something, yet decided to omit that little detail. Doesn't matter, see above. But I do find it telling that you think it makes a difference in terms of whether a citizen has rights or not. I take this as proof that you think there is some category of persons the members of which don't deserve to have their civil liberties protected. Care to explain? quote:
ORIGINAL: lazarus1983 We're debating a situation without knowing the complete and full truthful details. I refuse to accept this story "as is" as the complete and full truth, because I have been given no definitive proof that it is indeed true. Okay. So you are unwilling or unable to discuss something as a hypothetical? Strange... quote:
ORIGINAL: lazarus1983 And I agree, civil liberties do need to be fought for and protected. I don't believe you. You seem exactly the kind of person that co-signs shit like the Patriot Act. I mean, what do you care about a little inconvenience as long as your shopping experiences remains a positive one? What does it matter if policemen routinely violate various citizens' rights as long as it doesn't effect you, right? Again, I have to ask if this story is completely true. Perhaps the "victim" did something that caused the arrest, that he decided to omit. And I can look at this story from a hypothetical standpoint, and say that I'm still not convinced that we have all the details. Explain what, exactly? That your assumption is wrong? Okay. You're wrong, I don't believe that there is a class of people that should have less civil liberties than I have. At best, I believe that convicted criminals should have their liberties restricted. Whew, that was a toughie. But, I'm sure since you've already got me labeled, it doesn't matter how I care to explain myself. Everything I say will be filtered through the label you've placed on me. And that's perfectly fine that you don't believe me. I really don't give a shit about your opinions pertaining to me. The fact that some guy, living somewhere, believes that I don't think civil liberties should be protected, doesn't really bother me. I probably won't lose too much sleep over it. So I seem "Exactly" like the kind of person. And you base this judgment onnnn...what exactly? From my arguments in this one particular debate? Or maybe from my picture? Or did you scroll through my profile, look at my interests, and nod your head, "Yep, this guy is definitely into wiretapping." Rats, I guess I fit into the profile you've made for Patriot Act-supporters. Go profiling! And for the record, I've already stated that I'm against the Patriot Act. Scroll back through a couple pages.
|