Alt Facts and BS (formerly "current events")
Quote: FleaswatterShow me exactly where in the opinions the rules for ICE have been changed to where
"ICE can now detain them for any crime without bail for any amount of time"
I already did.
Justice Breyer says it
Its the dissenting opinion
Are you refusing to read it?
Dont ask me to keep showing you where it says it if you are just going to ignore both the answer and the court decision
I also supplied a link to an article that explains it.
If you keep repeating to point to something I have already pointed to...
Quote: onenickelmiracleSo which is the better jersey to anger Pittsburgh Steeler fans by wearing, Antonio Brown or Le'Veon Bell?
Baoshan Iron and Steel shirt
Largest Steel manufacturer on the planet, located in Shanghai, China
Big BenQuote: onenickelmiracleSo which is the better jersey to anger Pittsburgh Steeler fans by wearing, Antonio Brown or Le'Veon Bell?
Are you trying to commit Harikari? That brings great shame to you and your family.Quote: unJonBig Ben
Bad idea.Quote: terapinedBaoshan Iron and Steel shirt
Largest Steel manufacturer on the planet, located in Shanghai, China
Infowars has an unbelievable ridiculous story. chuckle
Alex Jones is promoting Rush Limbaugh jumping the shark
Here is the stupid theory Rush is pushing
The shooter in New Zealand is a leftist framing conservatives
WTF
Rush Limbaugh is a moron
https://www.infowars.com/limbaugh-christchurch-shooter-a-leftist-who-staged-false-flag-attack-to-frame-conservatives/
I subscribed to Pewdiepie.Quote: terapinedChecking out the far right wing fringe kooks for laughs
Infowars has an unbelievable ridiculous story. chuckle
Alex Jones is promoting Rush Limbaugh jumping the shark
Here is the stupid theory Rush is pushing
The shooter in New Zealand is a leftist framing conservatives
WTF
Rush Limbaugh is a moron
https://www.infowars.com/limbaugh-christchurch-shooter-a-leftist-who-staged-false-flag-attack-to-frame-conservatives/
They nabbed him with DNA. A 23 year
old barber who died in an asylum 30
years after the murders.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jack-the-ripper-identity-aaron-kosminski-named-forensic-scientists/
Quote: terapinedChecking out the far right wing fringe kooks for laughs
Infowars has an unbelievable ridiculous story. chuckle
Alex Jones is promoting Rush Limbaugh jumping the shark
Here is the stupid theory Rush is pushing
The shooter in New Zealand is a leftist framing conservatives
WTF
Rush Limbaugh is a moron
https://www.infowars.com/limbaugh-christchurch-shooter-a-leftist-who-staged-false-flag-attack-to-frame-conservatives/
Why do you care what other people listen to or watch?
Quote: terapinedChecking out the far right wing fringe kooks for laughs
Infowars has an unbelievable ridiculous story. chuckle
Alex Jones is promoting Rush Limbaugh jumping the shark
Here is the stupid theory Rush is pushing
The shooter in New Zealand is a leftist framing conservatives
WTF
Rush Limbaugh is a moron
https://www.infowars.com/limbaugh-christchurch-shooter-a-leftist-who-staged-false-flag-attack-to-frame-conservatives/
Stop, the shooter is clearly Mossad.
Quote: darkozThe case involved someone arrested for smoking marijuana who served out their sentence.
ICE can now detain them for any crime without bail for any amount of time
Theoretically an illegal could be imprisoned for life (indeterminate time) for something frivolous like smoking weed
Thats cruel and unusual punishment in most people's books including the founding fathers
If something egregious like that does happen (legally possible) expect a follow up suit
BTW - this decision leaves the door open for follow up suits
I guess the idea of the illegal alien self-deporting is out of the question?
Quote: AZDuffmanI guess the idea of the illegal alien self-deporting is out of the question?
Its about as unlikely as righties doing logical gun legislation
Quote: EvenBobJack the Ripper Finally Identified
They nabbed him with DNA. A 23 year
old barber who died in an asylum 30
years after the murders.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jack-the-ripper-identity-aaron-kosminski-named-forensic-scientists/
I'm relieved somehow because I cannot possibly be related to him with a -ski name. I must have thought I was a suspect. :)
Aaron Kosminski
Quote: darkozIts about as unlikely as righties doing logical gun legislation
Current gun legislation is logical. Except we need to have make it easier to get a concealed carry permit in all states and make states recognize concealed carry permits of any other state.
Quote: AZDuffmanCurrent gun legislation is logical. Except we need to have make it easier to get a concealed carry permit in all states and make states recognize concealed carry permits of any other state.
Yes lets make it easier for terrorists to get guns
And mentally unstable people
And children too
Very logical
Mhmmm
Quote: darkozYes lets make it easier for terrorists to get guns
And mentally unstable people
And children too
Very logical
Mhmmm
Gun laws prevent children from buying a gun already.
There are bigger problems than gun deaths. Only about 15,000 non-suicide gun deaths last year. But 70,000 people died from drug overdoses.
Instead of banning guns, shouldn't we make more laws to prevent people from buying herion? Especially laws making it harder for children and mentally unstable people from buying heroin?
Quote: AZDuffmanGun laws prevent children from buying a gun already.
There are bigger problems than gun deaths. Only about 15,000 non-suicide gun deaths last year. But 70,000 people died from drug overdoses.
Instead of banning guns, shouldn't we make more laws to prevent people from buying herion? Especially laws making it harder for children and mentally unstable people from buying heroin?
Of course!
No one is fighting for more accessible Heroin or other drugs
Only marijuana which is a low ranked drug less dangerous than alcohol healthwise
Quote: darkozOf course!
No one is fighting for more accessible Heroin or other drugs
Only marijuana which is a low ranked drug less dangerous than alcohol healthwise
OK, so what law do you think we need to make heroin less accessible? How would that work?
Quote: AZDuffmanOK, so what law do you think we need to make heroin less accessible? How would that work?
Why dont you make some sensible suggestions. I am all for sensible ways to fight heroin abuse.
If your suggestions are not sensible I will let you know
Quote: RSQuote: terapinedChecking out the far right wing fringe kooks for laughs
Infowars has an unbelievable ridiculous story. chuckle
Alex Jones is promoting Rush Limbaugh jumping the shark
Here is the stupid theory Rush is pushing
The shooter in New Zealand is a leftist framing conservatives
WTF
Rush Limbaugh is a moron
https://www.infowars.com/limbaugh-christchurch-shooter-a-leftist-who-staged-false-flag-attack-to-frame-conservatives/
Why do you care what other people listen to or watch?
???????
I don't care if people listen to Rush or Infowars.
I go to these sites to laugh at their absurd dumb theories.
I'm not complaining about Rush or Infowars. Quite the opposite. I'm laughing at Rush and Infowars
Quote: darkozWhy dont you make some sensible suggestions. I am all for sensible ways to fight heroin abuse.
If your suggestions are not sensible I will let you know
So you are saying just because we have more laws we will not prevent heroin abuse?
Quote: AZDuffmanSo you are saying just because we have more laws we will not prevent heroin abuse?
Nope I didnt say that
Stop making up stuff please
I think the right laws are needed. That's obvious. It's not working. Secure the borders. Actually we could probably burn up all the poppy fields in Mexico, they couldn't do anything about it.Quote: AZDuffmanSo you are saying just because we have more laws we will not prevent heroin abuse?
Quote: onenickelmiracleI think the right laws are needed. That's obvious. It's not working. Secure the borders. Actually we could probably burn up all the poppy fields in Mexico, they couldn't do anything about it.
Sadly, we are having a hard time with the "securing the border" thing. Democrats who supported an expansion of the border fence suddenly find the fence "racist"...but I would be advocating for a more secure border ANYWHERE that it was proven thousands upon thousands of illegal aliens crossed into our country. A combination of technology, a fence, the best possible ways to stop drugs from getting in at the legal crossings, and immediate ejections of illegal aliens would help...anything we can do to slow the flow and nab the ones bringing in drugs by any means.
I'm also for improving laws with consideration for possible unintended consequences. Too often we add laws without fixing ones already on the books and create extra issues. The "right" laws and no "wrong" ones is a great answer to heading in the right direction.
Eliminating as much of the gang population as we can--not just Latinos, but all of the drug pushing gangs--needs to be part of the equation.
Treatment for the addicted is a good thing but, as our family found out last year in the most horrid manner, one relapse with today's strengthened drugs can easily end in death.
Quote: RonCSadly, we are having a hard time with the "securing the border" thing.
If only the GOP could have done something about it. It's not like they had full control of our government for two years or anything...
Quote: AZDuffmanGun laws prevent children from buying a gun already.
There are bigger problems than gun deaths. Only about 15,000 non-suicide gun deaths last year. But 70,000 people died from drug overdoses.
Instead of banning guns, shouldn't we make more laws to prevent people from buying herion? Especially laws making it harder for children and mentally unstable people from buying heroin?
Why “instead”? Why do we only have the ability to work on one issue at a time. Why does one have to choose between drug laws and gun laws?
Quote: darkozNope I didnt say that
Stop making up stuff please
Then I am confused as to what you are saying. You imply that making a law solves the problem the way I am reading it.
Quote: ams288If only the GOP could have done something about it. It's not like they had full control of our government for two years or anything...
...and they lost the following election with nothing really good to run on...I agree.
Of course, there is nothing wrong with coming to a bipartisan solution with give and take on both sides. With an election coming and Trump's tendency to not be very politically savvy, I don't expect that to happen.
Quote: RonC
Treatment for the addicted is a good thing but, as our family found out last year in the most horrid manner, one relapse with today's strengthened drugs can easily end in death.
Sorry to hear about that. People you would never think can have issues. Guy I worked with, cleanest guy you can imagine, got hooked because of a high school injury. IMHO the first step is to separate that kind from folks doing it for recreation (e.g. "Pulp Fiction" or Jane from "Breaking Bad.") If we can find a better solution to legit pain we can cut back demand.
Quote: unJonWhy “instead”? Why do we only have the ability to work on one issue at a time. Why does one have to choose between drug laws and gun laws?
My position is gun violence is not a major problem. If a person is just worried about amount of people dying then work on the bigger issue first.
I am also trying to make a point about just "making laws."
Quote: AZDuffmanThen I am confused as to what you are saying. You imply that making a law solves the problem the way I am reading it.
I know laws are necessary
Whether they work or not depends on how effective they are.
Drug counseling and education about drugs are also wise moves
I know suggesting the laws arent enough and everyone needs to arm themselves so we can start shooting drug dealers and creating vigilante justice posses is probably where you are trying to steer everyone
Quote: darkozA supreme court decision also includes the dissenting opinion
I suppose you dont count justice Breyer a scotus judge?
What I said about indefinite detention is part of the decision even if voiced by Justice Breyer and the minority vote
Maybe you should read the full decision and not stop once you get to the parts you dont like
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2019/3/19/18272874/preap-nielsen-indefinite-detention-dissent
Quote: FleaswatterShow me exactly where in the opinions the rules for ICE have been changed to where
"ICE can now detain them for any crime without bail for any amount of time"
Quote: darkoz
I already did.
Justice Breyer says it
Its the dissenting opinion
Are you refusing to read it?
Dont ask me to keep showing you where it says it if you are just going to ignore both the answer and the court decision
I also supplied a link to an article that explains it.
If you keep repeating to point to something I have already pointed to...
Maybe you should actually spend time reading your own reference.
I quote from YOUR reference:
Quote:The court’s decision doesn’t create any new powers for ICE
Sure seems to contradict your bogus claim.
https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-metro-staten-island-accused-mob-boss-killer-anthony-comello-extradition-frank-cali-20190318-story.html
Or have mobsters learned to weponize nut-jobs?
Quote: darkoz
I know suggesting the laws arent enough and everyone needs to arm themselves so we can start shooting drug dealers and creating vigilante justice posses is probably where you are trying to steer everyone
Wasn't even on my mind, but might not be a bad idea. Few weeks ago I did see a car with a sign saying "SHOOT YOUR LOCAL HEROIN DEALER" in the back window. So it could come to that.
Quote: AZDuffmanWasn't even on my mind, but might not be a bad idea. Few weeks ago I did see a car with a sign saying "SHOOT YOUR LOCAL HEROIN DEALER" in the back window. So it could come to that.
As long as you understand shooting your local heroin dealer makes you a criminal and not on the side of law enforcement
Quote: FleaswatterQuote: FleaswatterShow me exactly where in the opinions the rules for ICE have been changed to where
"ICE can now detain them for any crime without bail for any amount of time"
Maybe you should actually spend time reading your own reference.
I quote from YOUR reference:
Sure seems to contradict your bogus claim.
Why dont you quote the first paragraph in that link?
OOOOPPPS. Cause it proves what I said!
More of the same right wing BS. State one sentence out if context that appears to disprove another persons valid point while ignoring the entire rest of the article
Quote: darkozAs long as you understand shooting your local heroin dealer makes you a criminal and not on the side of law enforcement
Hmm... that scenario would get TWO criminals off the street in one fell swoop.... sounds good to me!
Of course.Quote: EvenBobGreat non political news.
Quote: darkozAs long as you understand shooting your local heroin dealer makes you a criminal and not on the side of law enforcement
Find the guy who made the sign and tell him. OTOH, if I'm around and a guy shoots a known heroin dealer I might not be sure what I saw.
Quote: FleaswatterQuote: FleaswatterShow me exactly where in the opinions the rules for ICE have been changed to where
"ICE can now detain them for any crime without bail for any amount of time"
Maybe you should actually spend time reading your own reference.
I quote from YOUR reference:
Sure seems to contradict your bogus claim.
My initial claim was that immigrants can be held for years for even minor crimes
I know that scares you. Not because you think its wrong but because deep down you know if its true that is going to be challenged in court and you ARENT going to be able to detain immigrants for years for minor crimes like you prefer.
At any rate here are 8 (read them all if you wish to even be taken seriously anymore) quotes from that same link you half blindingly read which 1000% prove me correct in my original statement.
1:
Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents have the power to arrest people who aren’t US citizens and detain them for months or years, based on past convictions, with no chance of release on bond.
2:
That’s what the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday in the case Preap v. Nielsen.
3:
wrote Justice Stephen Breyer in a dissent for the Court’s four liberals, that Tuesday’s ruling “will work serious harm to the principles for which American law has long stood” — principles that say that, as a rule, the government can’t detain anyone indefinitely without showing cause
4:
Even the conservative majority didn’t argue that mandatory detention as it exists is constitutional.
5:
Mandatory detention without bond is legal. The question is whether it applies years after the crime.
6:
Supreme Court held that those immigrants were... had to be detained until their cases were resolved, no matter how long that took.
7:
The lead plaintiff in the case, Mony Preap, was a green-card holder who was picked up by ICE seven years after serving sentences for two minor drug convictions, then detained for months as ICE sought to strip him of his green card and deport him.
8:
Just as they did in the 2018 mandatory-detention ruling, the conservatives made a point of saying they weren’t considering whether or not the statute was constitutional because that wasn’t directly being challenged in this case.
I know its number 8 quote that really scares you. Because the statute can still be challenged as constitutional or not. And thats when this farce may end
Quote: darkozMy initial claim was that immigrants can be held for years for even minor crimes
No your actual initial claim (and what i disagreed with you about) was that the court case changed the amount of time ICE can detain immigrants. Here again is your actual claim (emphasis in bold is mine):
Quote: darkozICE can now detain them for any crime without bail for any amount of time
Again, the court ruling did NOT change anything with respect to the length of time an immigrant can be held.
The rest of your writing concerning the length of time an immigrant can be held is just continued obfuscation of your behalf.
Quote: onenickelmiracleActually we could probably burn up all the poppy fields in Mexico, they couldn't do anything about it.
Quote: FleaswatterNo your actual initial claim (and what i disagreed with you about) was that the court case changed the amount of time ICE can detain immigrants. Here again is your actual claim (emphasis in bold is mine):
Quote: darkozICE can now detain them for any crime without bail for any amount of time
Again, the court ruling did NOT change anything with respect to the length of time an immigrant can be held.
The rest of your writing concerning the length of time an immigrant can be held is just continued obfuscation of your behalf.
Who is obfuscating
The statement "Ice can now detain them for any crime without bail" is manifestly true.
The statement "Ice was able to hold them prior to this decision indefinitely" would also be true
There is absolutely no way the initial statement I made is untrue. Your choice to add your own interpretation notwithstanding there is really here only one definition of my making an accurate statement
To wit:
Can Ice detain immigrants without bail indefinitely for any crime at this time: answer = yes.
Statement: " Ice can now detain immigrants without bail indefinitely for any crime" must be truthful. To argue that is not a true statement is to argue things not factually correct
Quote: FleaswatterAgain, the court ruling did NOT change anything with respect to the length of time an immigrant can be held.
Sure it did
The law was confusing.
Its a really bad decision and I agree with Breyer
The govt should not have the right to hold anybody indefinitely with no hearing
Quote: FleaswatterAgain, the court ruling did NOT change anything with respect to the length of time an immigrant can be held.
Quote: terapinedSure it did
You are 100% wrong.
Do yourself a favor
read the actual opinion
I can provide you a link
If you are unable to find it
Quote: RonCSadly, we are having a hard time with the "securing the border" thing. Democrats who supported an expansion of the border fence suddenly find the fence "racist"...
It is. Proof. Let's say you have Mexican people living in the house next to yours on one side, and Canadian people living in the house on the other side and you keep going on about only building a fence across the Mexican side of the yard. Racist.
The wall is 100% about Trump's ego so he can leave a physical legacy, because he's a real estate/building guy at heart, and in his mind, if he doesn't leave a wall, he'll have no legacy. That's all this is about.
The wall won't fix anything. When people try to get into this country, they'll just say, "Once we get past the wall, we'll be okay, because the U.S. sucks at catching and deporting people that are already in." That's the message the wall debate is sending to everyone wanting to sneak into the U.S.
Quote: rxwineIt is. Proof. Let's say you have Mexican people living in the house next to yours on one side, and Canadian people living in the house on the other side and you keep going on about only building a fence across the Mexican side of the yard. Racist.
How is that racist?
