Ad JS

Collapse

Leaderboard

Collapse

Leaderboard Tablet

Collapse

Leaderboard Mobile

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

If Cops Enforce All Laws, Even Those They Disagree With...

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Pogue Mahone View Post
    I don't think my example is that far-fetched when many conservatives not only won't accept a ban on 3rd trimester abortions, but won't accept anything other than a complete ban.


    In spite of my views on abortion, you do realize I posted this mostly in jest?
    i know it's in jest. But this is epic probable cause.

    "Why did you stop my client?"

    "I had probable cause to believe that he was in violation of the new jerk-off law"

    "Deputy, why would believe that? My client isn't a criminal he a healthy normal male who doesn't do that and he has a girlfriend and is going to college!"

    "ah, your Honor his counsel just prove my case..."

    semper destravit

    Comment


    • #32
      I guess guys had best keep the pants zipped up....theirs or someone else's.
      This Space For Rent

      Comment


      • #33
        I guess in that case carrying condoms would be a felony.
        Train for tomorrow, for you never know what it will bring to the fight.
        In the school of Policing, there is no graduation day.

        Arguing on the internet, is like wrestling with a pig in mud. After a while you realize that while you are getting dirty, the pig is actually enjoying it.
        Do Not Disturb sign should read, Already Disturbed Proceed With Caution.
        Even if the voices aren't real, They have some really good ideas.

        Comment


        • #34
          Would possession of pron be like possession of ammunition?
          This Space For Rent

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Langford PR View Post

            If it was served consecutively.....I'd still be in prison from offenses committed when I was thirteen!
            At $100 fine per violation, ...well you would owe them a lot of money.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by tanksoldier View Post
              There comes a point where abortion is killing a child. You can argue where that exact point IS but IMO that's just putting lipstick on the proverbial pig.

              It was OK for me to kill this YESTERDAY, but not TODAY. OK, fine... whatever lets you sleep at night.



              If killing a fetus before it is born is OK, then we should be able to kill babies after they are born.

              There comes a point where the two are indistinguishable except that one in still inside mom and the other isn't.

              If the only difference is the portal the infant passed thru, lets make it the hospital doors instead.
              The difference is that while the fetus is inside the mother, she has absolutely full control over it.

              The fetus is 100% reliant on the mother for all its nutrients and the mother essentially acts as life support.

              The mother has right to cut off life support at anytime.

              Let me put it this way. If the mother kills herself with a fetus inside her, is it considered murder-suicide?

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by chip4 View Post
                The difference is that while the fetus is inside the mother, she has absolutely full control over it.
                No-one, except perhaps an omnipotent being, has "absolutely" full control over anything.

                The fetus is 100% reliant on the mother for all its nutrients and the mother essentially acts as life support.
                Neonates are nearly as dependent as fetuses are on their lives being supported other than by themselves. A set of differences is definable, in that: in the case of a fetus, much of the necessary support is such that only the mother can provide it, while in the case of a neonate, persons other than the mother can provide sufficient support.

                The mother has right to cut off life support at anytime.
                No, she doesn't, whether her child is already born or not. Even in the Roe v. Wade case, and subsequently in the Planned Parenthood v. Casey case, the USSC recognized a late-term "viability" distinction. I recognize other bright-line distinctions. And late-term abortions don't merely "cut off life support" -- the actual procedures are horribly gruesome -- not something to be inflicted on anyone -- certainly not upon an innocent not-yet-born child.

                Let me put it this way. If the mother kills herself with a fetus inside her, is it considered murder-suicide?
                If she does so intentionally, I would consider it such -- please note that you repeatedly called the mother of a fetus a mother -- to me that means you know the fetus is a child.
                Last edited by Monty Ealerman; 03-20-2017, 12:13 AM.

                Comment


                • #38
                  UPDATE

                  With possibly the best headline I've ever seen.....
                  Texas masturbation bill is now in the hands of the Texas State Affairs Committee


                  http://www.chron.com/news/houston-te...f-11052043.php

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by tanksoldier View Post
                    There comes a point where abortion is killing a child. You can argue where that exact point IS but IMO that's just putting lipstick on the proverbial pig.

                    It was OK for me to kill this YESTERDAY, but not TODAY. OK, fine... whatever lets you sleep at night.



                    If killing a fetus before it is born is OK, then we should be able to kill babies after they are born.

                    There comes a point where the two are indistinguishable except that one in still inside mom and the other isn't.

                    If the only difference is the portal the infant passed thru, lets make it the hospital doors instead.
                    tanksoldier said something here that actually matters ...

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      She looks like the type who would want to regulate something like that.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Monty Ealerman View Post
                        No-one, except perhaps an omnipotent being, has "absolutely" full control over anything.


                        Neonates are nearly as dependent as fetuses are on their lives being supported other than by themselves. A set of differences is definable, in that: in the case of a fetus, much of the necessary support is such that only the mother can provide it, while in the case of a neonate, persons other than the mother can provide sufficient support.


                        No, she doesn't, whether her child is already born or not. Even in the Roe v. Wade case, and subsequently in the Planned Parenthood v. Casey case, the USSC recognized a late-term "viability" distinction. I recognize other bright-line distinctions. And late-term abortions don't merely "cut off life support" -- the actual procedures are horribly gruesome -- not something to be inflicted on anyone -- certainly not upon an innocent not-yet-born child.


                        If she does so intentionally, I would consider it such -- please note that you repeatedly called the mother of a fetus a mother -- to me that means you know the fetus is a child.
                        Well said, agreed 100%.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Thank you beachcop05 -- as you obviously already know, those babies' lives matter ...

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Copyright violation is a civll issue of course, but this lawmaker plagiarized the movie Legally Blonde, where she used that argument in a legal class debate about fathers' rights.

                            As to when life starts and where to draw the line, if the fetus is viable (developed enough to live outside the womb) they should remove it alive and put it up for adoption.
                            "Every day should include a perfectly grilled thick steak, freshly roasted coffee and seats on the 50-yardline.

                            Oh, and bacon. It should start with bacon."
                            ------- Me

                            ~~~~

                            Agent and manager of the world's only authentic lucky football kitty. Don't believe me?
                            Just look at the Seattle Seahawks 1976-2010, compared to 2011-present. (and yes, I've been a fan that long)

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by foodnerd
                              ...
                              As to when life starts and where to draw the line, if the fetus is viable (developed enough to live outside the womb) they should remove it alive and put it up for adoption.
                              Thank you for being a Nurse. In my opinion, including but not limited to "if the fetus is viable", leave things fine and let the baby be born. Mom already made her choice 9 months earlier.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Sometimes a woman doesn't make that choice willingly. It's forced on her by stranger, acquaintance, or blood relative....

                                Then there's this....

                                https://www.google.com/amp/www.mirro...d-10292103.amp
                                Last edited by NOLA2005; 04-25-2017, 01:17 PM.
                                "No one saves us but ourselves. No one can and no one may. We ourselves must walk the path."

                                Comment

                                MR300x250 Tablet

                                Collapse

                                What's Going On

                                Collapse

                                There are currently 6956 users online. 284 members and 6672 guests.

                                Most users ever online was 19,482 at 12:44 PM on 09-29-2011.

                                Welcome Ad

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X