"if That Bubble Touches Me, I'm Going To Arrest You"

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Mr Cat' timestamp='1287597456' post='2181060']
[center][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVwXOKZh4Os[/media][/quote][/center]
OOOooo a video by a bias liberal news agency.


[quote name='Mr Cat' timestamp='1287597456' post='2181060']. Yes... because you DIDN'T compare it to vandalism, you didn't just argue again that it was menacing, and you didn't argue in favor of "[i]Officer Bubbles[/i]". Maybe considering watching or learning what happened leading up to and during this protest in particular might help you understand.[/quote]

I compared it to poking a dog with a stick then whining when the dog bites. And I'm sorry but our time is up, but thanks for playing the game.

[quote name='Mr Cat' timestamp='1287597456' post='2181060']The situation simply could of been handled better, the officer unnecessarily intimated frighten the girl, and arrested a girl who did nothing to warrant arrest. She fact she [u]cooperated[/u] with "Officer Bubbles"... So now she gets to enjoy the shame and exposure of of jail. I think the reason why you KnightofChrist arguing this upsets me is you argue so strongly for respect and protection of women, but then see the aggressive male as justified. When this was happening it appears a large crowd gathered outside of the protest to protest what the police were doing... The police were in the wrong.If you touched my nephew or niece because they were blowing bubbles at you, considering their little kids, I would have to retaliate. Which would also include you being expelled from wherever this was.

But I am so pleased that you consider being dragged away to jail comparable to a "little" swat on the bottom.[/quote]

I don't think the woman was acting her age or being respectful to the police officer, she purposefully was trying to upset and irritate him. Then got arrested, big surprise. She should have acted like an adult and known better. Children get spankings adults go to jail. Welcome to real life.


[quote name='Mr Cat' timestamp='1287597456' post='2181060']If you touched my nephew or niece because they were blowing bubbles at you, considering their little kids, I would have to retaliate. Which would also include you being expelled from wherever this was.
[/quote]

Interesting, you would retaliate after the fact for your nephew or niece, but in another thread not for the Blessed Lord? Interesting indeed. I never claimed to want to spank your nephew or niece. I was speaking of my own.

Edited October 20, 2010 by KnightofChrist

[Mr.Cat]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1287602872' post='2181074']OOOooo a video by a bias liberal news agency.[/quote]It's actually the same agency that did the video on the first post of this topic, that we all keep referring back to. There are many videos, take your pick.[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1287602872' post='2181074']I compared it to poking a dog with a stick then whining when the dog bites. And I'm sorry but our time is up, but thanks for playing the game.[/quote]Which that dog would be put down, that is a matter of law and practice. Even if it was a guard dog, their trained to be as non-violent as possible while still being aggressive. I guess you posting videos of vandalism had nothing to do with the topic.[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1287602872' post='2181074'] 1) I don't think the woman was acting her age or being respectful to the police officer, she purposefully was trying to upset and irritate him. Then got arrested, big surprise. She should have acted like an adult and known better. Children get spankings adults go to jail. Welcome to real life.[/quote] 1) Even if she was, she stopped and cooperated immediately. 2) She got arrested on what charge was that again? I love how you defend the police just arresting people without cause, because it wasn't the bubbles. 3) I'm glad you cleared up your misnomer from before. Being dragged to jail is not comparable to a "little swat" on the behind, but nice use of illusions to still try make it seem like it is. 4) When I listen to you, I don't hear "real life".[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1287602872' post='2181074']Interesting, you would retaliate after the fact for your nephew or niece, but in another thread not for the Blessed Lord? Interesting indeed. I never claimed to want to spank your nephew or niece. I was speaking of my own.[/quote]Yes... because attacking God is exactly the same as attacking an innocent and defenseless child. Although, you should read the topic more carefully, I did say the Blessed Sacrament ought be protected.

Edited October 20, 2010 by Mr Cat

[KnightofChrist]

I'm sorry but you seem far too bitter to spend my blessed existance on anymore today.

God Bless and the Peace of Christ be with you.

[Mr.Cat]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1287603409' post='2181078']I'm sorry but you seem far too bitter to spend my blessed existance on anymore today.[/quote]So bitter that you use arguments with children compared to God? I actually take a bit of offense to that.[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1287603409' post='2181078']God Bless and the Peace of Christ be with you.[/quote]No, keep it this time friend. You need it more than I.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Mr Cat' timestamp='1287603679' post='2181083']
No, keep it this time friend. You need it more than I.
[/quote]

Nah not bitter in the slightest.

[Mr.Cat]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1287603923' post='2181085']Nah not bitter in the slightest.[/quote] I get more of KnightofChrist's blessed existence today...

Edited October 20, 2010 by Mr Cat

[Maggyie]

Lads don't follow each other from thread to thread being unfriendly to each other, would you treat Jesus that way? Cuz each of you is Jesus to the other.

[Mr.Cat]

[quote name='Maggie' timestamp='1287605166' post='2181097']Lads don't follow each other from thread to thread being unfriendly to each other, would you treat Jesus that way? Cuz each of you is Jesus to the other[/quote]I am a imperfect human, working with an imperfect knowledge, within an imperfect institution aspiring for something better in faith, hope, and sometimes charity. I don't hesitate to admit my short comings or let things go. The expression, "[i]What is done is done and tomorrow is another day[/i]" comes to my mind.

Though honestly there is part of me that finds it all fun, because of the personal history that has developed between KnightofChrist and me, its hard for me to take him seriously. But you are right Maggie, I am sorry. Even those people who ruffle my feathers deserve better and perhaps I have developed a bit of a bad perspective, I will let it go.

Edited October 20, 2010 by Mr Cat

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='notardillacid' timestamp='1287580357' post='2180992']
Did you know that the U.S. Government flew planes into buildings so we could invade other countries? I can even link you to a website with authoritative proof!
[/quote]

Is it a website like this, where the State admits the presence of their agents, and admitted one of them had a rock? [url="http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/08/23/police-montebello.html"]http://www.cbc.ca/ca...montebello.html[/url]

It must have just been a paperweight.

~Sternhauser

Edited October 20, 2010 by Sternhauser

[MichaelFilo]

I think the problem is some people don't care about the state's growing power. Well, it is to your folly. Wise government is limited government, and when you think it's ok for officers to see themselves as some privileged class of people then we must part ways. After all, I believe all men are created in the image of God, and that principal translates into the equality of man inherent in our system. The intent is that even the president is no better than the average man, much less a police officer.

It is not a matter of being bitter, but if you don't protect the rights of those you oppose (and I oppose those groups who went protesting) then expect your own rights to be circumvented.

Also, what about our American policy of due process and equal protection under the law. Why is it ok for the president to put out a hit on an American citizen without a trial? See, even if you think this president will be wise with his new powers the next one might not be. This president's administration called pro-lifers potential terrorists, as well as returning soldiers. Do you see the potential here?

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='MichaelFilo' timestamp='1287611921' post='2181121']
I think the problem is some people don't care about the state's growing power. Well, it is to your folly. Wise government is limited government, and when you think it's ok for officers to see themselves as some privileged class of people then we must part ways. After all, I believe all men are created in the image of God, and that principal translates into the equality of man inherent in our system. The intent is that even the president is no better than the average man, much less a police officer.

It is not a matter of being bitter, but if you don't protect the rights of those you oppose (and I oppose those groups who went protesting) then expect your own rights to be circumvented.

Also, what about our American policy of due process and equal protection under the law. Why is it ok for the president to put out a hit on an American citizen without a trial? See, even if you think this president will be wise with his new powers the next one might not be. This president's administration called pro-lifers potential terrorists, as well as returning soldiers. Do you see the potential here?
[/quote]

You see, Michael, nothing is wrong, because if you don't like it, you can vote, or move. Those two facts obviously make the current situation a just one.

~Sternhauser

[rizz_loves_jesus]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1287602872' post='2181074']
I don't think the woman was acting her age or being respectful to the police officer, she purposefully was trying to upset and irritate him. Then got arrested, big surprise. She should have acted like an adult and known better. Children get spankings adults go to jail. Welcome to real life.
[/quote]

Being irritating isn't a crime.

[havok579257]

[quote name='rizz_loves_jesus' timestamp='1287628631' post='2181195']
Being irritating isn't a crime.
[/quote]


more proft that these threads give unchristian citizens a pass. the women was acting unchristian. she was trying to provoke a response from the cop. she was told to stop blowing bubbles in the officers face and she kept it up. she had to be told again to stop and then she finally did.

although i am perfectly sure Jesus would have done the same thing to the officer. cause he was so big on being unchristian

how about not giving an unchristian women a pass just because? how about holding her unchristian actions accountable as not being christian and trying to provoke a response.

oh wait i forgot, she gets a pass because she is not a cop.

[havok579257]

[quote name='Mr Cat' timestamp='1287597456' post='2181060']
[center][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVwXOKZh4Os[/media][/center]
Yes... because you DIDN'T compare it to vandalism, you didn't just argue again that it was menacing, and you didn't argue in favor of "[i]Officer Bubbles[/i]". Maybe considering watching or learning what happened leading up to and during this protest in particular might help you understand.

Which isn't the reason given that she was taken into custody nor the reason why the police BLOCKED people from dispersing from the protest. So the argument of blowing bubbles is COMPLETELY irrelevant, but I guess in your mind the girl blowing bubbles should of been pinned to the ground and tased. If you watch the video the female officer with him seems a little [b]surprised[/b] at his response.

The situation simply could of been handled better, the officer unnecessarily intimated frighten the girl, and arrested a girl who did nothing to warrant arrest. She fact she [u]cooperated[/u] with "Officer Bubbles"... So now she gets to enjoy the shame and exposure of of jail. I think the reason why you KnightofChrist arguing this upsets me is you argue so strongly for respect and protection of women, but then see the aggressive male as justified. When this was happening it appears a large crowd gathered outside of the protest to protest what the police were doing... The police were in the wrong.If you touched my nephew or niece because they were blowing bubbles at you, considering their little kids, I would have to retaliate. Which would also include you being expelled from wherever this was.

But I am so pleased that you consider being dragged away to jail comparable to a "little" swat on the bottom.
[/quote]


so the unchristian women gets a pass for her unchristian actions because she is not a cop. got ya. only cops can do wrong and being unchristian is not wrong at all. so glad that is made clear now.

[MichaelFilo]

She put it away. It was not bothering the other cop.

If a child and a parent both call each other idiots you hold the parent accountable and not the child. Why? Because one has the power of force. They have a heavier weight on their shoulders. Police are entrusted with certain powers but they are expected to be more prudent than the average citizen.

Blowing bubbles is not unchristian. She put them away as soon as he said. His anger was unchristian. Even then, it is all irrelevant because she got arrested for simply having a backpack, a number on her hand, and a bandanna.

[Norseman82]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' timestamp='1287543369' post='2180904']
actually, there were plenty of reasons for people to be ****** off at the g20. like the fact that somehow it cost us canadians a BILLION DOLLARS.
[/quote]

Maybe it wouldn't cost you a billion dollars if those bratty hooligans weren't rioting and causing property damage. Those are the ones you should be "urinated" off at.

Edited October 21, 2010 by Norseman82

[ardillacid]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1287628528' post='2181193']
You see, Michael, nothing is wrong, because if you don't like it, you can vote, or move. Those two facts obviously make the current situation a just one.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]
Huzzah for Stern, slaying the Mighty Strawman!

[Mr.Cat]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1287631687' post='2181213']so the unchristian women gets a pass for her unchristian actions because she is not a cop. got ya. only cops can do wrong and being unchristian is not wrong at all. so glad that is made clear now.[/quote]"A pass"? Did you just come into this conversation after lightly skimming the topic?

Peace Officers are supposed to exhibit a self-control and self-discipline above children fighting in the back seat with the cry of "[i]shes touching me!!![/i]" I guess you disagree?

I suspect you think this woman is "unchristian"? Really, based on what? From my perspective there is nothing to determine what she is or isn't. I also like how you gloss over the ENTIRE situation as with the mentality of"[i]anti-police[/i]". It makes me wonder why I cared to mentioned that she cooperated with "[i]Officer Bubbles[/i]".

I am starting to speculate that some people feel that women should be cherished, protected, and respected in as much as their doing what their told. Do you think a woman protesting at all is unchristian? What do you think she should of done when the officer asked her to stop, [i]other than stop because that's what she did[/i].

Edited October 21, 2010 by Mr Cat

[rizz_loves_jesus]

[quote name='havok579257' timestamp='1287631562' post='2181212']
more proft that these threads give unchristian citizens a pass. the women was acting unchristian. she was trying to provoke a response from the cop. she was told to stop blowing bubbles in the officers face and she kept it up. she had to be told again to stop and then she finally did.

although i am perfectly sure Jesus would have done the same thing to the officer. cause he was so big on being unchristian

how about not giving an unchristian women a pass just because? how about holding her unchristian actions accountable as not being christian and trying to provoke a response.

oh wait i forgot, she gets a pass because she is not a cop.
[/quote]

sifjslak;fj ;lksad jklfj ksdljahf oia;eu wtoikjaewk; ru90q32iujrnwek;s

You aren't understanding what I'm saying.

Being unchristian ISN'T A CRIME.

You CANNOT arrest someone simply because you don't like them or because they're annoying/irritating.

I did think he was a little rude, but he was within his right to be rude. However, he was NOT within his right to arrest her. You can't arrest someone just because. You just can't. Why are you not seeing this??

Had she assaulted him or ACTUALLY COMMITTED A CRIME he would have had the right to arrest her!! But she didn't! So arresting her was out of line!

Edited October 21, 2010 by rizz_loves_jesus

[MichaelFilo]

[quote name='rizz_loves_jesus' timestamp='1287633518' post='2181223']
sifjslak;fj ;lksad jklfj ksdljahf oia;eu wtoikjaewk; ru90q32iujrnwek;s

You aren't understanding what I'm saying.

Being unchristian ISN'T A CRIME.

You CANNOT arrest someone simply because you don't like them or because they're annoying/irritating.

I did think he was a little rude, but he was within his right to be rude. However, he was NOT within his right to arrest her. You can't arrest someone just because. You just can't. Why are you not seeing this??
[/quote]


Freedom is not a concept that many people cherish, so protecting it is not meaningful to them.