Mega-Thread: Democratic 2020 Primaries

[Theodarzna]

i support whatever gives the most freedom to normal everyday citizens. guns, speech, all that.

where i disagree with freedom is in corporations and business in general. they need to be on a very tight leash, made to serve the people of our country, rather than their own self-interest and international interests.

My acceptance of 2nd Amendment / Private gun ownership is the fact that there is no public duty doctrine for cops. The police have no specific duty to be competent at their job. They can even be grossly bad at it, outright gun people down and perform what amounts to street execution and recieve no punative response. A cop who fails to perform their public duty, or even intentionally doesn't is never going to be punished. Without incredible public pressure.

All of this stemming from the police having the privilege of Qualified Immunity. In 1981 the Warren vs District of Columbia found that police do not owe a specific obligation to citizens to provide police services under the public duty doctrine. Castle Rock v. Gonzalez found the same basic ruling. All of this means police have what is called Qualified Immunity, This doctrine, invented by the Court in the ashes of the Civil War, immunizes public officials even when they commit legal misconduct unless they violated ‘clearly established law.’ That standard is incredibly difficult for civil rights plaintiffs to overcome because the courts have required not just a clear legal rule, but a prior case on the books with functionally identical facts.

What we have today is horrific. When ordinary citizens violate a law (usually that they had no reason to think even existed, given the vast reach of the law today), they can’t escape responsibility by saying, “But we did not know that was illegal.” But when it comes to the police and other government officials, they can and do escape responsibility because the courts say, “How were they to know their conduct was illegal?” because of qualified immunity.

So as a point of order, no I don't trust the police to protect citizens and believe its fine for citizens to have firearms for their own protection.

[Swnem]

My acceptance of 2nd Amendment / Private gun ownership is the fact that there is no public duty doctrine for cops. The police have no specific duty to be competent at their job. They can even be grossly bad at it, outright gun people down and perform what amounts to street execution and recieve no punative response. A cop who fails to perform their public duty, or even intentionally doesn't is never going to be punished. Without incredible public pressure.

All of this stemming from the police having the privilege of Qualified Immunity. In 1981 the Warren vs District of Columbia found that police do not owe a specific obligation to citizens to provide police services under the public duty doctrine. Castle Rock v. Gonzalez found the same basic ruling. All of this means police have what is called Qualified Immunity, This doctrine, invented by the Court in the ashes of the Civil War, immunizes public officials even when they commit legal misconduct unless they violated ‘clearly established law.’ That standard is incredibly difficult for civil rights plaintiffs to overcome because the courts have required not just a clear legal rule, but a prior case on the books with functionally identical facts.

What we have today is horrific. When ordinary citizens violate a law (usually that they had no reason to think even existed, given the vast reach of the law today), they can’t escape responsibility by saying, “But we did not know that was illegal.” But when it comes to the police and other government officials, they can and do escape responsibility because the courts say, “How were they to know their conduct was illegal?” because of qualified immunity.

So as a point of order, no I don't trust the police to protect citizens and believe its fine for citizens to have firearms for their own protection.

Do you think that has something to do with the fact that civilians are armed? Policemen are people too. They also fear for their lives doing their job when any lunatic can pull a gun on them and kill them. So, i can't really blame them if they rather take the initiative than gamble their lives away. One beckons the other.

These problems only happen in the US you know? You don't have trigger happy police in europe. The difference? Strict gun restriction laws.
Added bonus: less random shootings and mass murders.

But hey... you do you. You don't trust the police and the police doesn't trust you. It goes both ways. What could go wrong?

[Ghostpanther]

My acceptance of 2nd Amendment / Private gun ownership is the fact that there is no public duty doctrine for cops. The police have no specific duty to be competent at their job. They can even be grossly bad at it, outright gun people down and perform what amounts to street execution and recieve no punative response. A cop who fails to perform their public duty, or even intentionally doesn't is never going to be punished. Without incredible public pressure.

All of this stemming from the police having the privilege of Qualified Immunity. In 1981 the Warren vs District of Columbia found that police do not owe a specific obligation to citizens to provide police services under the public duty doctrine. Castle Rock v. Gonzalez found the same basic ruling. All of this means police have what is called Qualified Immunity, This doctrine, invented by the Court in the ashes of the Civil War, immunizes public officials even when they commit legal misconduct unless they violated ‘clearly established law.’ That standard is incredibly difficult for civil rights plaintiffs to overcome because the courts have required not just a clear legal rule, but a prior case on the books with functionally identical facts.

What we have today is horrific. When ordinary citizens violate a law (usually that they had no reason to think even existed, given the vast reach of the law today), they can’t escape responsibility by saying, “But we did not know that was illegal.” But when it comes to the police and other government officials, they can and do escape responsibility because the courts say, “How were they to know their conduct was illegal?” because of qualified immunity.

So as a point of order, no I don't trust the police to protect citizens and believe its fine for citizens to have firearms for their own protection.

I do not trust them to save myself and family, because it would take about 30 mins for them to get to our place anyway. And even those in the big cities, unless you get lucky and get one to respond to a 911 call who happens to be patrolling close by, it can take 10 mins or longer. The average police response time for a 911 call is 8 mins. You can get tied up, beaten and/or killed in less time than that and the criminal leave the crime scene. But this is another topic for another thread.

But candidates who support the Second Amendment will be a serous stance for many voters. On both sides of the political aisle. Warren has gone on record basically for slowly legislating restrictions over a period of time. Kind of like, when you want to level out a old home, you need to do it in slow stages or you can break something. But in the end, the goal can be achieved. I know what hers is. The ultimate goal is to weaken the rights of the citizen's rights to keep and bear arms.

[Theodarzna]

Do you think that has something to do with the fact that civilians are armed? Policemen are people too. They also fear for their lives doing their job when any lunatic can pull a gun on them and kill them. So, i can't really blame them if they rather take the initiative than gamble their lives away. One beckons the other.

These problems only happen in the US you know? You don't have trigger happy police in europe. The difference? Strict gun restriction laws.
Added bonus: less random shootings and mass murders.

But hey... you do you. You don't trust the police and the police doesn't trust you. It goes both ways. What could go wrong?

In the two cases I cited, the Warren v. District of Columbia happened in 1975, when three women were abducted by a home intruder, two of the women called the police and hid on the roof. The police dispatcher labeled this a code 2 assignment, despite it being a code 1 assignment as it was a crime in progress. Police arrived, but didn't bother looking around and only knocked on the front door. The two women tried again but were ignored by dispatch. In the end all three women ended up abducted and sexually assaulted by the intruder. The rapes took place for about fourteen hours and the three filed a case of negligence against DC policy in which the court found the police essentially have zero obligation to actually render services to citizens.

Castle Rock v. Gonzalez has a failure to uphold a restraining order which led to the murder of three children by an estranged husband. The police ignored the calls and only acted when the he turned himself in with three kids corpses in his car carved up like freshly slaughtered pigs.

In both instances, the police were declared to have qualified immunity. Neither case which asserts Qualified Immunity does so on the grounds that citizens are armed, only that the material facts are that police owe zero duty to actually provide police services to citizens in any specific case. So you cannot actually expect the police to protect you here.

This is one of the reasons I have some sympathy with say Black Lives Matter, because it is the stone cold truth, legally; cops don't have to actually render police services. They can be utterly negligent and abandon their supposed obligations because legally they have no obligations.

- - - Updated - - -

I do not trust them to save myself and family, because it would take about 30 mins for them to get to our place anyway. And even those in the big cities, unless you get lucky and get one to respond to a 911 call who happens to be patrolling close by, it can take 10 mins or longer. The average police response time for a 911 call is 8 mins. You can get tied up, beaten and/or killed in less time than that and the criminal leave the crime scene. But this is another topic for another thread.

But candidates who support the Second Amendment will be a serous stance for many voters. On both sides of the political aisle. Warren has gone on record basically for slowly legislating restrictions over a period of time. Kind of like, when you want to level out a old home, you need to do it in slow stages or you can break something. But in the end, the goal can be achieved. I know what hers is. The ultimate goal is to weaken the rights of the citizen's rights to keep and bear arms.

For rural people that is also a factor, the police are far as fuck away. So not only do they have no obligation to do their job, they are also far as fuck away from your house.

[Swnem]

In the two cases I cited, the Warren v. District of Columbia happened in 1975, when three women were abducted by a home intruder, two of the women called the police and hid on the roof. The police dispatcher labeled this a code 2 assignment, despite it being a code 1 assignment as it was a crime in progress. Police arrived, but didn't bother looking around and only knocked on the front door. The two women tried again but were ignored by dispatch. In the end all three women ended up abducted and sexually assaulted by the intruder. The rapes took place for about fourteen hours and the three filed a case of negligence against DC policy in which the court found the police essentially have zero obligation to actually render services to citizens.

Castle Rock v. Gonzalez has a failure to uphold a restraining order which led to the murder of three children by an estranged husband. The police ignored the calls and only acted when the he turned himself in with three kids corpses in his car carved up like freshly slaughtered pigs.

In both instances, the police were declared to have qualified immunity. Neither case which asserts Qualified Immunity does so on the grounds that citizens are armed, only that the material facts are that police owe zero duty to actually provide police services to citizens in any specific case. So you cannot actually expect the police to protect you here.

This is one of the reasons I have some sympathy with say Black Lives Matter, because it is the stone cold truth, legally; cops don't have to actually render police services. They can be utterly negligent and abandon their supposed obligations because legally they have no obligations.

Look, there is more here than "police are bad guys". There is an educational problem on top of negligence, but at the end of the day, no one is perfect. Mistakes will happen.

I'm not sure what your point is? That if people had guns, maybe these situations would be averted? Because then you would just create many more cases of man slaughter and mass shootings.

Don't get me wrong though, there should be consequences to neglicence. Dunno if criminal as that might be too heavy, but the policemen should be demoted or fired for the mistakes.

It really surprises me how things are so terrible in the US when the police can't relent cause the civilians are armed or the civilians for thinking they are not there to protect them. It's really messed up. I am very blessed i wasn't born in the US. I wouldn't be able to live in fear constantly. Just the thought than everyone in the street might have a gun and might go crazy and start shooting...man. Your life can end in a flash for no good reason. It's messed up.

[Theodarzna]

Look, there is more here than "police are bad guys". There is an educational problem on top of negligence, but at the end of the day, no one is perfect. Mistakes will happen.

I'm not sure what your point is? That if people had guns, maybe these situations would be averted? Because then you would just create many more cases of man slaughter and mass shootings.

Don't get me wrong though, there should be consequences to neglicence. Dunno if criminal as that might be too heavy, but the policemen should be demoted or fired for the mistakes.

It really surprises me how things are so terrible in the US when the police can't relent cause the civilians are armed or the civilians for thinking they are not there to protect them. It's really messed up. I am very blessed i wasn't born in the US. I wouldn't be able to live in fear constantly. Just the thought than everyone in the street might have a gun and might go crazy and start shooting...man. Your life can end in a flash for no good reason. It's messed up.

Mistakes happen, but when those mistakes are given the full approval of the government and indeed the government has said police are allowed to make as many mistakes as they please and can completely derelict their alleged duty, than I don't trust the police. And I am a "normal" White Woman saying this, imagine what a Black or Brown Woman would feel knowing the cops can just let you get wrecked? And or you know if I was a Black Woman with a son knowing the cops can just use my kid to re-enact the book The Most Dangerous Game. Yeah, fuck that, fuck all of that.

My point is that I don't begrudge someone taking their personal protection into their own hands. The idea that you can depend on the cops is not just proven wrong by many peoples experiences but also is enshrined in law. You have know justifiable reason other than blind faith and trust to not make use of the rights you have. I personally own no firearms, I own a crossbow and some knives and bladed things because I just don't like loud noises, at most I might spring for a 9mm handgun someday.

As for mass shootings, we have tons of violence in this society, there is violence in some major cities in Europe, there is violence all around. I don't believe in disarming peoples ability to protect themselves given the police force has no legal obligation to do so.

[szechuan]

As for mass shootings, we have tons of violence in this society, there is violence in some major cities in Europe, there is violence all around. I don't believe in disarming peoples ability to protect themselves given the police force has no legal obligation to do so.

Yet those countries have nowhere near the same amount of Gun Violence and Mass Shootings.

Police Force have no obligation but they also are also always on Edge because of the Amount of Guns in the US compared to other countries they are unequatable.

The idea that you can depend on the cops is not just proven wrong by many peoples experiences but also is enshrined in law.

You CAN depend on Cops especially in certain cities and states in the USA, You can't however reliably rely on a Good Man with a Gun.

It isn't, Law can be changed so can an outdated constitution.

Mistakes happen, but when those mistakes are given the full approval of the government and indeed the government has said police are allowed to make as many mistakes as they please and can completely derelict their alleged duty, than I don't trust the police.

LMAO where is this "FULL APPROVAL" of these Police Mistakes let alone the "Approval" from the Government?

If anything the Government has been trying to keep Corrupt Police in Check.

[Muzjhath]

All of this stemming from the police having the privilege of Qualified Immunity. In 1981 the Warren vs District of Columbia found that police do not owe a specific obligation to citizens to provide police services under the public duty doctrine. Castle Rock v. Gonzalez found the same basic ruling. All of this means police have what is called Qualified Immunity, This doctrine, invented by the Court in the ashes of the Civil War, immunizes public officials even when they commit legal misconduct unless they violated ‘clearly established law.’ That standard is incredibly difficult for civil rights plaintiffs to overcome because the courts have required not just a clear legal rule, but a prior case on the books with functionally identical facts.

The problem doesn't stem from those rulings. Even if they don't help.

The problem stems from the fact that in the US being a police officer isn't something you need to be qualified and trained for. It's something you get a 2 week course in and then get told to do.
Instead of it being a 3 year college/trade school education that covers the shit they need to know.

[Shalcker]

The problem doesn't stem from those rulings. Even if they don't help.

The problem stems from the fact that in the US being a police officer isn't something you need to be qualified and trained for. It's something you get a 2 week course in and then get told to do.
Instead of it being a 3 year college/trade school education that covers the shit they need to know.

Isn't it different in every state?

Up to the point that police qualifications do not cross state, and sometimes even district lines?

[Swnem]

Mistakes happen, but when those mistakes are given the full approval of the government and indeed the government has said police are allowed to make as many mistakes as they please and can completely derelict their alleged duty, than I don't trust the police. And I am a "normal" White Woman saying this, imagine what a Black or Brown Woman would feel knowing the cops can just let you get wrecked? And or you know if I was a Black Woman with a son knowing the cops can just use my kid to re-enact the book The Most Dangerous Game. Yeah, fuck that, fuck all of that.

My point is that I don't begrudge someone taking their personal protection into their own hands. The idea that you can depend on the cops is not just proven wrong by many peoples experiences but also is enshrined in law. You have know justifiable reason other than blind faith and trust to not make use of the rights you have. I personally own no firearms, I own a crossbow and some knives and bladed things because I just don't like loud noises, at most I might spring for a 9mm handgun someday.

As for mass shootings, we have tons of violence in this society, there is violence in some major cities in Europe, there is violence all around. I don't believe in disarming peoples ability to protect themselves given the police force has no legal obligation to do so.

Every big city has some danger at night, because drunk groups are always a thing and of course there might be some drug crimes going around. But the likelyhood of getting shot is very very low. No one here feels the need to arm themselves to feel secure. We also have trust on the police. It is not nearly the same.

I understand the distrust going around there, but really, the more arms, the worse. You are also looking at a few extreme cases and assuming the worst will happen. There is a sense of paranoia going around on both sides. The police are there to protect you at the end of the day, wether they make a perfect job of it always or not. But distrust on your police force and keeping arms, will just force them to defend themselves and increase the chances of man slaughter crimes. It will never get better while people think they can take it into their own hands. No one will ever feel safe that way.

Now, of course, due to a bad educational system, religion and pronounced racism in some states there is a structural problem that needs solving for all of it to fall into place. My recommendation is for people to stop voting republican. They are not your friends. Democrats might not be perfect, but republicans actively wish to neuter, manipulate and take advantage of the people by keeping them dumb and paranoid. They are the root of the problems the US faces today in my opinion.

[szechuan]

They are the root of the problems the US faces today in my opinion.

They are, Right Wingers/ Right Leaners are the ones over-all causing most of the issues in the U.S.A.

Right Wingers who support Trump can also Care less about Rights of Minorities, Women, and LGBT's among other things like the Environment etc...

And people wonder why people call some Right Wingers Racist, Bigoted, Hateful.

[Ghostpanther]

And another loser drops out of the race...https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nyc...sidential-race

New York Mayor Bill de Blasio announced Friday he is dropping out of the 2020 Democratic primary, ending his campaign after struggling to gain traction in the race.

[zenkai]

And another loser drops out of the race...https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nyc...sidential-race

New York Mayor Bill de Blasio announced Friday he is dropping out of the 2020 Democratic primary, ending his campaign after struggling to gain traction in the race.

Glad to see that, he fucked up NYC don't need him fucking up the country.

[Ghostpanther]

Glad to see that, he fucked up NYC don't need him fucking up the country.

Lol! For sure.

Meanwhile this report just came out about Yang...https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics...ed-ex-employee

Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang has come under fire by a former employee who claims she was let go from her job because she tied the knot, according to a bombshell article authored by the accuser.

“Despite my hitting every single revenue mark set for me, despite not a single employment infraction over the six years, Andrew Yang fired me because I got married,”

Not sure it is true, so I am not going to assume it is. But if it is, it does give a peak into his personal values.

[zenkai]

Lol! For sure.

Meanwhile this report just came out about Yang...https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics...ed-ex-employee

Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang has come under fire by a former employee who claims she was let go from her job because she tied the knot, according to a bombshell article authored by the accuser.

“Despite my hitting every single revenue mark set for me, despite not a single employment infraction over the six years, Andrew Yang fired me because I got married,”

Not sure it is true, so I am not going to assume it is. But if it is, it does give a peak into his personal values.

Sounds more credible than kavanaugh allegations, should be easily proven with paperwork. Just wondered why she didn't sue his ass though.

[Dontrike]

Glad to see that, he fucked up NYC don't need him fucking up the country.

How come? You love it when Trump does it.

[szechuan]

Sounds more credible than kavanaugh allegations, should be easily proven with paperwork. Just wondered why she didn't sue his ass though.

Yet the FBI didn't even investigate Kavanaugh.

[Theodarzna]

Every big city has some danger at night, because drunk groups are always a thing and of course there might be some drug crimes going around. But the likelyhood of getting shot is very very low. No one here feels the need to arm themselves to feel secure. We also have trust on the police. It is not nearly the same.

I understand the distrust going around there, but really, the more arms, the worse. You are also looking at a few extreme cases and assuming the worst will happen. There is a sense of paranoia going around on both sides. The police are there to protect you at the end of the day, wether they make a perfect job of it always or not. But distrust on your police force and keeping arms, will just force them to defend themselves and increase the chances of man slaughter crimes. It will never get better while people think they can take it into their own hands. No one will ever feel safe that way.

Now, of course, due to a bad educational system, religion and pronounced racism in some states there is a structural problem that needs solving for all of it to fall into place. My recommendation is for people to stop voting republican. They are not your friends. Democrats might not be perfect, but republicans actively wish to neuter, manipulate and take advantage of the people by keeping them dumb and paranoid. They are the root of the problems the US faces today in my opinion.

The more arms, doesn't really matter. It is settled law and ones constitutional right to own them. Trust does not exist, and why should it? The fact is legally cops don't have to make a good job of it, they have qualified immunity. They can just let a mass shooting go down and do jack shit, because, Qualified Immunity.

- - - Updated - - -

The problem doesn't stem from those rulings. Even if they don't help.

The problem stems from the fact that in the US being a police officer isn't something you need to be qualified and trained for. It's something you get a 2 week course in and then get told to do.
Instead of it being a 3 year college/trade school education that covers the shit they need to know.

Every state and sometimes within states has a different requirement. But also those two court cases enshrine as a matter of law that they don't have to be doing their alleged job.

[szechuan]

The more arms, doesn't really matter. It is settled law and ones constitutional right to own them.

Wrong, also The Constitution is NOT like the Holy Grail and it can also be Amended.

[Theodarzna]

Yet those countries have nowhere near the same amount of Gun Violence and Mass Shootings.

Police Force have no obligation but they also are also always on Edge because of the Amount of Guns in the US compared to other countries they are unequatable.

You CAN depend on Cops especially in certain cities and states in the USA, You can't however reliably rely on a Good Man with a Gun.

It isn't, Law can be changed so can an outdated constitution.

LMAO where is this "FULL APPROVAL" of these Police Mistakes let alone the "Approval" from the Government?

If anything the Government has been trying to keep Corrupt Police in Check.

Warren v. District of Columbia and Castle Rock v. Gonzalez mean they absolutely have no obligation to do their job and in neither case were guns a factor.

- - - Updated - - -

Wrong, also The Constitution is NOT like the Holy Grail and it can also be Amended.

Then amend it?