DISARMING AMERICA'S HEROES

Ironsights wrote:
well i will agree that we have many remedies in our current legal justice system to cure any such wrongful claims. however, the issue still stands that by the standards of due process they are required to appear before a judge to be claimed mentally incompetent not the other way around.

Sage wrote:

Azadeh wrote:

2seaoat wrote:Seaoat, I wasn't posting to your response, but to the title of this thread. It's just not true. I'm so sick of these inane emails people get then post here as truth.


I miss your input and hope you have been playing in the sandbox with a sock......I sometimes wish I knew where Star went, and I was having the same worries about you, but you just kind of appear and disappear. Again, I miss your input, and always enjoyed an intelligent debate whether we agreed or disagreed.

Thank you, Seaoat. I really appreciate it.

I just wish that more research and thought would be put into what you read and believe on the internet. It has become a huge source of misleading people and disseminating nonfactual information. Resources are available to aid in finding out the facts about a particular subject.

PROVE its false or stfu.

Just because you say it doesnt make it so.

Prove it. debunk it. I want you to.

2seaoat wrote:I fight government overreaching every day....not with rhetoric.....I sue the bastards. I have filed suit against a government agency who wanted to buy my property before I bought it so they hassled the prior owner.....they gave up.....they even posted a memorandum on my property so when I was doing my due diligence to purchase the property.....the state had a memo which said the property had violations.........So, I hop in a car and go to the state capital to meet with the bureaucrats who five of them sat in a room and told me that I could not buy this property because there were 83 violations.......I said thank you gentleman, but I will seek the advise of a judge and will file a declaratory judgment to determine if you folks are right or wrong on those violations and I will have my lawyer file the same when I return.......they go whoaaaaaaaa.....hold it seaoat.......why don't you give us a week and we will send you a letter with the violations which need to be corrected.......so I get a letter a week later, and instead of the vaunted 83 violations, I find six violations which need to be corrected.....no more bleach bottles blocking a portion of the river, no more shooting at canoeist, improved flow in two causeways........they had scared off twenty buyers, and had rendered the property almost worthless taking the rights away from the prior owner, but if I was a wussy, and quivered every time some government person said jump.....well yes, I might buy into your night light fears.....but some of us fight......the real fight every day......so I went to court when the bastards told me I could not have a bathroom trailer on my property.....most would say yes sir.....how high do you want me to jump......nope, I am taking the bastards to the mat, just like I have a hundred times before with villages, counties, cities, and every other form of the government which over reaches.....nope this comrade is not a wussy, and I actually believe in the constitution and am currently sticking the fifth and fourteenth amendment right up their rears where they usually keep their heads. Please do not confuse common sense with appeasement of our bill of rights, and do not assume that all government is bad....we have a great nation.....we have a great constitution......it just might be too much for scardy pants to understand.....but you take the bastards on.....using the evil system you fear.....and you win.....it is that simple.

Azadeh wrote:

Sage wrote:

PROVE its false or stfu.

Just because you say it doesnt make it so.

Prove it. debunk it. I want you to.

No, I will not "stfu". This claim makes no logical sense. It is another attempt to manufacture outrage among people who cannot see it for the fallacy it is.
It is up to you to prove it is true since you have made the affirmation that it is so.

2seaoat wrote:utter nonsense......it would take less than 30 days to correct any mistaken conclusion of incompetency......I guess you have to be incompetent to read this thread and believe otherwise.

2seaoat wrote:Seaoat, I wasn't posting to your response, but to the title of this thread. It's just not true. I'm so sick of these inane emails people get then post here as truth.


I miss your input and hope you have been playing in the sandbox with a sock......I sometimes wish I knew where Star went, and I was having the same worries about you, but you just kind of appear and disappear. Again, I miss your input, and always enjoyed an intelligent debate whether we agreed or disagreed.

Floridatexan wrote:

No, you don't. You'd be screaming like the wicked witch of the West..."I'm melting...melting..."

Azadeh wrote:

Sage wrote:

PROVE its false or stfu.

Just because you say it doesnt make it so.

Prove it. debunk it. I want you to.

No, I will not "stfu". This claim makes no logical sense. It is another attempt to manufacture outrage among people who cannot see it for the fallacy it is.
It is up to you to prove it is true since you have made the affirmation that it is so.

Azadeh wrote:
And that pounds one more nail in the coffin of this distortion.

I cannot understand what the purpose is behind the dregs of society creating emails with half truths and contemptible stories that do nothing more than create histrionic reactions. These emails get people all worked up over nothing. Just look at the silly FEMA Army Corps stories that are now making the rounds. When will it ever end?

Floridatexan wrote:

I completely share your opinion...I have gone to court for friends...I have gone to face the state over another friend's sales taxes. I absolutely hate it when people don't fight back.

PACEDOG#1 wrote:

Azadeh wrote:

Sage wrote:

PROVE its false or stfu.

Just because you say it doesnt make it so.

Prove it. debunk it. I want you to.

No, I will not "stfu". This claim makes no logical sense. It is another attempt to manufacture outrage among people who cannot see it for the fallacy it is.
It is up to you to prove it is true since you have made the affirmation that it is so.

NO woman, it's your job to see if it is true or not. She is the OP. If you don't agree, find evidence to dispute or go live in a van down by the river.

Azadeh wrote:

Sage wrote:

PROVE its false or stfu.

Just because you say it doesnt make it so.

Prove it. debunk it. I want you to.

No, I will not "stfu". This claim makes no logical sense. It is another attempt to manufacture outrage among people who cannot see it for the fallacy it is.
It is up to you to prove it is true since you have made the affirmation that it is so.

Floridatexan wrote:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/melaniehaiken/2013/02/05/22-the-number-of-veterans-who-now-commit-suicide-every-day/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/09/veterans-ptsd-crime-report_n_1951338.html

It's not a big jump to think that some veterans...and some active duty military...would have anger issues and severe PTSD, especially after multiple deployments. If someone has been diagnosed by the VA as suffering from PTSD, that makes them mentally ill...remember how we were discussing trying to keep mentally unstable people away from guns?

2seaoat wrote:utter nonsense......it would take less than 30 days to correct any mistaken conclusion of incompetency......I guess you have to be incompetent to read this thread and believe otherwise.

PkrBum wrote:Guilty until or if you can prove you're innocent... Just another example of engineered enlightenment. Less is more.

2seaoat wrote: If someone has been diagnosed by the VA as suffering from PTSD, that makes them mentally ill...remember how we were discussing trying to keep mentally unstable people away from guns?

And contrary to what some are trying to say.....that decision is ALWAYS reviewable. This country works......if the scardy pants would just keep their night lights on and get some sleep, we would not need this paranoia becoming some sleep deprived reality.

PkrBum wrote:I think seagoat and I were mostly speaking in theoreticals... not knowing the validity of the action. I don't see how it could be true unless there was some procedure and redress... it would represent itself to me as a fundamental shift in burden (which apparently is okey dokie to some). It would impose a variety of hardships on a defendant... not the least of which is forfeiture. There's no compelling rational imo to forgo due process or to shift the burdon of proof. There have been plenty of things deemed (usually temporarily) legal in this country for a variety of rationals... that didn't make them just or constitutional.

Fancy wrote:

PkrBum wrote:I think seagoat and I were mostly speaking in theoreticals... not knowing the validity of the action. I don't see how it could be true unless there was some procedure and redress... it would represent itself to me as a fundamental shift in burden (which apparently is okey dokie to some). It would impose a variety of hardships on a defendant... not the least of which is forfeiture. There's no compelling rational imo to forgo due process or to shift the burdon of proof. There have been plenty of things deemed (usually temporarily) legal in this country for a variety of rationals... that didn't make them just or constitutional.

Proven guilty unless you prove other wise?

wonder how many people will just say fuck it.

W_T_M wrote:

Fancy wrote:

PkrBum wrote:I think seagoat and I were mostly speaking in theoreticals... not knowing the validity of the action. I don't see how it could be true unless there was some procedure and redress... it would represent itself to me as a fundamental shift in burden (which apparently is okey dokie to some). It would impose a variety of hardships on a defendant... not the least of which is forfeiture. There's no compelling rational imo to forgo due process or to shift the burdon of proof. There have been plenty of things deemed (usually temporarily) legal in this country for a variety of rationals... that didn't make them just or constitutional.

Proven guilty unless you prove other wise?

wonder how many people will just say fuck it.

...........................................................

I can name a few.



You do that all of the time....make an accusation that's completely false, and then expect the victim you're slandering to prove your de facto remark is actually just more of your unending vengeance when scorned.

No filters or sense of propriety, and you're pretty dadgum proud of it too.

PkrBum wrote:Cmon... can't y'all just practice the idiocy in one thread? I know I would appreciate it... others prolly would too.