From ‘liquid biopsies’ to precision medicine, these five developments will change cancer care in the next decade. Learn more.

Reply
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
205
Views

Re: Man Dies in Police Raid on Wrong House

205 Views
Message 21 of 42

@GraysonL320504 wrote:

@Centristsin2010 wrote:

@GraysonL320504 wrote:


ONCE AGAIN WE GET MEANINGLESS NONSENSE THAT DOESN'T ADDRESS ANYTHING.  NOTHING NEW.

 

The real shame is you don't even seem to understand what context is. YOUR topic is about a man being shot by the police. The comment about civil liability was in that context. No it wasn't.  Yjere was no context.  Just an unrelated sentence.  But I couldn't careless.  

 

So YOUR topic is not the context of this thread.  And your comment about civil liability had NOTHING to do with this thread.  Brilliant. Of course.  Thank you.  By the way, since one of the things you like to do is make snide remarks about typos instead of addressing anything that was said, try this.  Actually, I address most of the nonsense you post and I especially enjoy noting when you claim no references are posted when they clearly are.  But those who have no interest in listening to and hearing a different view, or are intolerant of others, are what they are........  

 

The real question is do you actually have anything that addresses your topic?  If I didn't, you wouldn't be posting your snide whine here.

But, in fact, you don't.  If you did you'd post it.  As usual, yiou (sic) try to hide the fact that you don't by making a snide remark.  Apparently you STILL don't know what a fact is...

 

A couple other comments regarding your comment and your topic:  Oh, you mean I did have something that addresses my topic.  LMAO.

 

No, I mean I have a couple other comments and I clearly stated them.  Something you seem unable to do.  Instead, Oh, but as usual, they are out of context.

 

So your opinion that police who do wrong are punished has been proven to be "flawed".  Shocking!


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
205
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
191
Views

Re: Man Dies in Police Raid on Wrong House

191 Views
Message 22 of 42

@Centristsin2010 wrote:

@GraysonL320504 wrote:


ONCE AGAIN WE GET MEANINGLESS NONSENSE THAT DOESN'T ADDRESS ANYTHING.  NOTHING NEW.

 

The real shame is you don't even seem to understand what context is. YOUR topic is about a man being shot by the police. The comment about civil liability was in that context. No it wasn't.  Yjere was no context.  Just an unrelated sentence.  But I couldn't careless.  

 

So YOUR topic is not the context of this thread.  Brilliant.  By the way, since one of the things you like to do is make snide remarks about typos instead of addressing anything that was said, try this.  The words you're looking for are "there" (yjere (sic) is gibberish) and "care less."  But careless certainly describes your response.  By the way, if you really "couldn't careless (sic)" you wouldn't respond.

 

The real question is do you actually have anything that addresses your topic?  If I didn't, you wouldn't be posting your snide whine here.

But, in fact, you don't.  If you did you'd post it.  As usual, yiou try to hide the fact that you don't by making a snide remark.

 

A couple other comments regarding your comment and your topic:  Oh, you mean I did have something that addresses my topic.  LMAO.

 

No, I mean I have a couple other comments and I clearly stated them.  Something you seem unable to do.  Instead, AS USUAL, you post another snide remark.  Good thinking. 

 

And on and on it goes.  Here's a little advice.  When you are unable to make a rational response, making a snide remark just makes you look foolish.  You'd be better off saying nothing when you really have nothing to say.  Remember, even a fish wouldn't get in trouble if it kept its mouth shut.

 

 

 

 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
191
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
192
Views

Re: Man Dies in Police Raid on Wrong House

192 Views
Message 23 of 42

@Centristsin2010 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@Centristsin2010 wrote:

@GraysonL320504 wrote:

@Centristsin2010 wrote:

@GraysonL320504 wrote:

@Centristsin2010 wrote:


So civil liability is why there needs to be reform of the legal system???  LMAO!  


Hilarious.  Same old nonsense of picking something to take out of context to respond to.  Same old nonsense.  How can you claim something was "taken out of context" when there was NO context.  Just a lame comment without any context!!!

 

But, yes, civil liability needs to be reformed as much as the criminal code because 1) there is as much "civil liability" in someone pulling an illegal sawed-off shot gun and shooting at the cops yep, a warning shot.....civil liability since they barged into the wrong home, causing the situation that got one killed.


The real shame is you don't even seem to understand what context is. YOUR topic is about a man being shot by the police. The comment about civil liability was in that context. No it wasn't.  Yjere was no context.  Just an unrelated sentence.  But I couldn't careless.  And just as shameful YOUR response is ample evidence you have no FACTS to add about YOUR topic so, AS USUAL, you picked out a sentence to make a snide remark about, i.e. your normal response. The real question is do you actually have anything that addresses your topic?  If I didn't, you wouldn't be posting your snide whine here.

 

A couple other comments regarding your comment and your topic:  Oh, you mean I did have something that addresses my topic.  LMAO.

 

Image result for judge judy gifs

 

 

 

1. You also have NO UNDERSTANDING of “civil liability.” For example, for the sake of argument, let's say the police are liable even though they did EVERYTHING they were suppose to do,Yeah....not sure any intelligent person would think busting in the wrong house was doing "everything they were supposed to do.....:  That says everything.....Geesh......rather odd perspective.....

 

i.e. obtained a warrant from a judge who would not have granted it for that address without probable cause Oh, so the FBI DID get a valid warrant then......

and CLEARLY identified themselves as police both verbally and visually. Contributory negligence laws (you obviously need to look up the term) would reduce the amount to nothing because the police DID everything they were supposed to do and the occupant did not. In addition, he had and used an illegal weapon whicxh forced them to defend themselves. But as we all know, there will be a payoff because it is expeditious and cost effective, NOT because it is right or even in accordance with the law.  We'll see......I'd bet you're wrong.  

 

2. But the REAL problem is little liberals who can't think for themselves so they go after the police regardless of right and wrong because that's what the liberal elite tell them to do. Really?  Who are they?  You may be hallucinating again.....

 

Here, tell us why this family won't walk away with millions.....

 

 

The incidence of police wrong doing is nothing compared to EVERYTHING they do and no one suggested otherwise.  But those who are unable to tolerate differing opinions just prefer to whing and make up the thoughts of others.....only in their own mind.

 

and I don't know of any ACTUAL police wrong doing that hasn't been dealt with legally. It maybe because you don't pay attention or couldn't care less.

 

Cop did wrong and NOT dealt with legally

 

Only One Cop was charged....should have been at least 6 others

 

But the FACT is the liberal elite is only interested in dividing the country   Boy, they must be busy.  The division comes from those who embrace a liar, a bigot and a racist...you know, the one who called himself an elitist?  Thanks for your concern.


The hatred for the police is so strong that the poster had to bring back the Judge Judy thing to try to mock logic and resurrect an April incident (already fully explored) to further the "cause".


It's sad that some adults are so simple-minded to think one can only love or hate anything. Logic say's some can like and respect something and point out the deficiences when applicable..  It's called open-mindedness and objectivity which often is lacking from extremists.

 

Fully explored?  LMAO!!!!!


And, naturally, along comes the giggle. Only things missing are Limbaugh and Fox.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
192
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
204
Views

Re: Man Dies in Police Raid on Wrong House

204 Views
Message 24 of 42

@rk9152 wrote:

@Centristsin2010 wrote:

@GraysonL320504 wrote:

@Centristsin2010 wrote:

@GraysonL320504 wrote:

@Centristsin2010 wrote:


So civil liability is why there needs to be reform of the legal system???  LMAO!  


Hilarious.  Same old nonsense of picking something to take out of context to respond to.  Same old nonsense.  How can you claim something was "taken out of context" when there was NO context.  Just a lame comment without any context!!!

 

But, yes, civil liability needs to be reformed as much as the criminal code because 1) there is as much "civil liability" in someone pulling an illegal sawed-off shot gun and shooting at the cops yep, a warning shot.....civil liability since they barged into the wrong home, causing the situation that got one killed.


The real shame is you don't even seem to understand what context is. YOUR topic is about a man being shot by the police. The comment about civil liability was in that context. No it wasn't.  Yjere was no context.  Just an unrelated sentence.  But I couldn't careless.  And just as shameful YOUR response is ample evidence you have no FACTS to add about YOUR topic so, AS USUAL, you picked out a sentence to make a snide remark about, i.e. your normal response. The real question is do you actually have anything that addresses your topic?  If I didn't, you wouldn't be posting your snide whine here.

 

A couple other comments regarding your comment and your topic:  Oh, you mean I did have something that addresses my topic.  LMAO.

 

Image result for judge judy gifs

 

 

 

1. You also have NO UNDERSTANDING of “civil liability.” For example, for the sake of argument, let's say the police are liable even though they did EVERYTHING they were suppose to do,Yeah....not sure any intelligent person would think busting in the wrong house was doing "everything they were supposed to do.....:  That says everything.....Geesh......rather odd perspective.....

 

i.e. obtained a warrant from a judge who would not have granted it for that address without probable cause Oh, so the FBI DID get a valid warrant then......

and CLEARLY identified themselves as police both verbally and visually. Contributory negligence laws (you obviously need to look up the term) would reduce the amount to nothing because the police DID everything they were supposed to do and the occupant did not. In addition, he had and used an illegal weapon whicxh forced them to defend themselves. But as we all know, there will be a payoff because it is expeditious and cost effective, NOT because it is right or even in accordance with the law.  We'll see......I'd bet you're wrong.  

 

2. But the REAL problem is little liberals who can't think for themselves so they go after the police regardless of right and wrong because that's what the liberal elite tell them to do. Really?  Who are they?  You may be hallucinating again.....

 

Here, tell us why this family won't walk away with millions.....

 

 

The incidence of police wrong doing is nothing compared to EVERYTHING they do and no one suggested otherwise.  But those who are unable to tolerate differing opinions just prefer to whing and make up the thoughts of others.....only in their own mind.

 

and I don't know of any ACTUAL police wrong doing that hasn't been dealt with legally. It maybe because you don't pay attention or couldn't care less.

 

Cop did wrong and NOT dealt with legally

 

Only One Cop was charged....should have been at least 6 others

 

But the FACT is the liberal elite is only interested in dividing the country   Boy, they must be busy.  The division comes from those who embrace a liar, a bigot and a racist...you know, the one who called himself an elitist?  Thanks for your concern.


The hatred for the police is so strong that the poster had to bring back the Judge Judy thing to try to mock logic and resurrect an April incident (already fully explored) to further the "cause".


It's sad that some adults are so simple-minded to think one can only love or hate anything. Logic say's some can like and respect something and point out the deficiences when applicable..  It's called open-mindedness and objectivity which often is lacking from extremists.

 

Fully explored?  LMAO!!!!!


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
204
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
194
Views

Re: Man Dies in Police Raid on Wrong House

194 Views
Message 25 of 42

@Centristsin2010 wrote:

@GraysonL320504 wrote:

@Centristsin2010 wrote:

@GraysonL320504 wrote:

@Centristsin2010 wrote:


So civil liability is why there needs to be reform of the legal system???  LMAO!  


Hilarious.  Same old nonsense of picking something to take out of context to respond to.  Same old nonsense.  How can you claim something was "taken out of context" when there was NO context.  Just a lame comment without any context!!!

 

But, yes, civil liability needs to be reformed as much as the criminal code because 1) there is as much "civil liability" in someone pulling an illegal sawed-off shot gun and shooting at the cops yep, a warning shot.....civil liability since they barged into the wrong home, causing the situation that got one killed.


The real shame is you don't even seem to understand what context is. YOUR topic is about a man being shot by the police. The comment about civil liability was in that context. No it wasn't.  Yjere was no context.  Just an unrelated sentence.  But I couldn't careless.  And just as shameful YOUR response is ample evidence you have no FACTS to add about YOUR topic so, AS USUAL, you picked out a sentence to make a snide remark about, i.e. your normal response. The real question is do you actually have anything that addresses your topic?  If I didn't, you wouldn't be posting your snide whine here.

 

A couple other comments regarding your comment and your topic:  Oh, you mean I did have something that addresses my topic.  LMAO.

 

Image result for judge judy gifs

 

 

 

1. You also have NO UNDERSTANDING of “civil liability.” For example, for the sake of argument, let's say the police are liable even though they did EVERYTHING they were suppose to do,Yeah....not sure any intelligent person would think busting in the wrong house was doing "everything they were supposed to do.....:  That says everything.....Geesh......rather odd perspective.....

 

i.e. obtained a warrant from a judge who would not have granted it for that address without probable cause Oh, so the FBI DID get a valid warrant then......

and CLEARLY identified themselves as police both verbally and visually. Contributory negligence laws (you obviously need to look up the term) would reduce the amount to nothing because the police DID everything they were supposed to do and the occupant did not. In addition, he had and used an illegal weapon whicxh forced them to defend themselves. But as we all know, there will be a payoff because it is expeditious and cost effective, NOT because it is right or even in accordance with the law.  We'll see......I'd bet you're wrong.  

 

2. But the REAL problem is little liberals who can't think for themselves so they go after the police regardless of right and wrong because that's what the liberal elite tell them to do. Really?  Who are they?  You may be hallucinating again.....

 

Here, tell us why this family won't walk away with millions.....

 

 

The incidence of police wrong doing is nothing compared to EVERYTHING they do and no one suggested otherwise.  But those who are unable to tolerate differing opinions just prefer to whing and make up the thoughts of others.....only in their own mind.

 

and I don't know of any ACTUAL police wrong doing that hasn't been dealt with legally. It maybe because you don't pay attention or couldn't care less.

 

Cop did wrong and NOT dealt with legally

 

Only One Cop was charged....should have been at least 6 others

 

But the FACT is the liberal elite is only interested in dividing the country   Boy, they must be busy.  The division comes from those who embrace a liar, a bigot and a racist...you know, the one who called himself an elitist?  Thanks for your concern.


The hatred for the police is so strong that the poster had to bring back the Judge Judy thing to try to mock logic and resurrect an April incident (already fully explored) to further the "cause".

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
194
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
213
Views

Re: Man Dies in Police Raid on Wrong House

213 Views
Message 26 of 42

@GraysonL320504 wrote:

@Centristsin2010 wrote:

@GraysonL320504 wrote:

@Centristsin2010 wrote:


So civil liability is why there needs to be reform of the legal system???  LMAO!  


Hilarious.  Same old nonsense of picking something to take out of context to respond to.  Same old nonsense.  How can you claim something was "taken out of context" when there was NO context.  Just a lame comment without any context!!!

 

But, yes, civil liability needs to be reformed as much as the criminal code because 1) there is as much "civil liability" in someone pulling an illegal sawed-off shot gun and shooting at the cops yep, a warning shot.....civil liability since they barged into the wrong home, causing the situation that got one killed.


The real shame is you don't even seem to understand what context is. YOUR topic is about a man being shot by the police. The comment about civil liability was in that context. No it wasn't.  Yjere was no context.  Just an unrelated sentence.  But I couldn't careless.  And just as shameful YOUR response is ample evidence you have no FACTS to add about YOUR topic so, AS USUAL, you picked out a sentence to make a snide remark about, i.e. your normal response. The real question is do you actually have anything that addresses your topic?  If I didn't, you wouldn't be posting your snide whine here.

 

A couple other comments regarding your comment and your topic:  Oh, you mean I did have something that addresses my topic.  LMAO.

 

Image result for judge judy gifs

 

 

 

1. You also have NO UNDERSTANDING of “civil liability.” For example, for the sake of argument, let's say the police are liable even though they did EVERYTHING they were suppose to do,Yeah....not sure any intelligent person would think busting in the wrong house was doing "everything they were supposed to do.....:  That says everything.....Geesh......rather odd perspective.....

 

i.e. obtained a warrant from a judge who would not have granted it for that address without probable cause Oh, so the FBI DID get a valid warrant then......

and CLEARLY identified themselves as police both verbally and visually. Contributory negligence laws (you obviously need to look up the term) would reduce the amount to nothing because the police DID everything they were supposed to do and the occupant did not. In addition, he had and used an illegal weapon whicxh forced them to defend themselves. But as we all know, there will be a payoff because it is expeditious and cost effective, NOT because it is right or even in accordance with the law.  We'll see......I'd bet you're wrong.  

 

2. But the REAL problem is little liberals who can't think for themselves so they go after the police regardless of right and wrong because that's what the liberal elite tell them to do. Really?  Who are they?  You may be hallucinating again.....

 

Here, tell us why this family won't walk away with millions.....

 

 

The incidence of police wrong doing is nothing compared to EVERYTHING they do and no one suggested otherwise.  But those who are unable to tolerate differing opinions just prefer to whing and make up the thoughts of others.....only in their own mind.

 

and I don't know of any ACTUAL police wrong doing that hasn't been dealt with legally. It maybe because you don't pay attention or couldn't care less.

 

Cop did wrong and NOT dealt with legally

 

Only One Cop was charged....should have been at least 6 others

 

But the FACT is the liberal elite is only interested in dividing the country   Boy, they must be busy.  The division comes from those who embrace a liar, a bigot and a racist...you know, the one who called himself an elitist?  Thanks for your concern.


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
213
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
223
Views

Re: Man Dies in Police Raid on Wrong House

223 Views
Message 27 of 42

@Centristsin2010 wrote:

@GraysonL320504 wrote:

@Centristsin2010 wrote:


So civil liability is why there needs to be reform of the legal system???  LMAO!  


Hilarious.  Same old nonsense of picking something to take out of context to respond to.  Same old nonsense.  How can you claim something was "taken out of context" when there was NO context.  Just a lame comment without any context!!!

 

But, yes, civil liability needs to be reformed as much as the criminal code because 1) there is as much "civil liability" in someone pulling an illegal sawed-off shot gun and shooting at the cops yep, a warning shot.....civil liability since they barged into the wrong home, causing the situation that got one killed.


The real shame is you don't even seem to understand what context is. YOUR topic is about a man being shot by the police. The comment about civil liability was in that context. And just as shameful YOUR response is ample evidence you have no FACTS to add about YOUR topic so, AS USUAL, you picked out a sentence to make a snide remark about, i.e. your normal response. The real question is do you actually have anything that addresses your topic?

 

A couple other comments regarding your comment and your topic:

 

1. You also have NO UNDERSTANDING of “civil liability.” For example, for the sake of argument, let's say the police are liable even though they did EVERYTHING they were suppose to do, i.e. obtained a warrant from a judge who would not have granted it for that address without probable cause and CLEARLY identified themselves as police both verbally and visually. Contributory negligence laws (you obviously need to look up the term) would reduce the amount to nothing because the police DID everything they were supposed to do and the occupant did not. In addition, he had and used an illegal weapon whicxh forced them to defend themselves. But as we all know, there will be a payoff because it is expeditious and cost effective, NOT because it is right or even in accordance with the law.

 

2. But the REAL problem is little liberals who can't think for themselves so they go after the police regardless of right and wrong because that's what the liberal elite tell them to do. The incidence of police wrong doing is nothing compared to EVERYTHING they do and I don't know of any ACTUAL police wrong doing that hasn't been dealt with legally. But the FACT is the liberal elite is only interested in dividing the country and the little liberals are just waaaaaaaaaaaaay too stupid to see through that and think for themselves.





Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
223
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
280
Views

Re: Man Dies in Police Raid on Wrong House

280 Views
Message 28 of 42

@GraysonL320504 wrote:

@Centristsin2010 wrote:


So civil liability is why there needs to be reform of the legal system???  LMAO!  


Hilarious.  Same old nonsense of picking something to take out of context to respond to.  Same old nonsense.  How can you claim something was "taken out of context" when there was NO context.  Just a lame comment without any context!!!

 

But, yes, civil liability needs to be reformed as much as the criminal code because 1) there is as much "civil liability" in someone pulling an illegal sawed-off shot gun and shooting at the cops yep, a warning shot.....civil liability since they barged into the wrong home, causing the situation that got one killed.

 

I'm with you, BigLib.....the "best they could do"?  Why is that?  I bet it was, "hey, we got a tip about drugs at the home and they are black ya know."  And that was the extent of the surveillance.


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
280
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
281
Views

Re: Man Dies in Police Raid on Wrong House

281 Views
Message 29 of 42

From ABC - Police admitted their mistake, saying faulty information from a drug informant contributed to the death of John Adams Wednesday night. They intended to raid the home next door.

 

But leave it to our resident cop-hater to turn this tragedy (for all concerned) into just one more "bad cop, bad cop" topic. 

 

And to add to the hate package there is, "Adams was black. The two policemen are white.  Shocking, eh?" - naturally trying to make a racial issue out of this.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
281
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
261
Views

Re: Man Dies in Police Raid on Wrong House

261 Views
Message 30 of 42

@GraysonL320504 wrote:


As I clearly stated, the police entered the wrong house.


Yup, that's where this story begins and ends. And the Constitution says that's a big no-no.

 

Hey, Cent - if this was the "best surveillance" this police department could do, I'd be surprised if they could find their butts with both hands.

 

 

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/statements/byruling/false/ (11 pages of lies and growing)
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
261
Views
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Open Enrollment: Oct 15-Dec 7, 2019 Find resources to help you decide on the best healthcare insurance plans for you during Open Enrollment season

Top Authors