November 13, 2008 10:47 AM
Time to throw in the towel on prosecuting DNC protesters?
Denver has prosecuted 18 people for protest-related activities during the Democratic National Convention. Thus far, the city's conviction record is 1-17 and lawyers for protesters wonder why the city continues to prosecute in the face of the losing streak.
John C. Ensslin reports:
So far, the city attorney has dismissed eight defendants, juries acquitted six and judges acquitted two. One faces retrial after a jury deadlocked."If the Denver Nuggets opened their season with a 1-17 record, people would raise serious questions about what changes needed to be made," said Brian Vincente, executive director of the People's Law Project,.
He said the mounting number of acquittals suggested that many of the 106 people charged were "haphazardly" arrested during a demonstration at 15th and Court streets.
But City Attorney David Fine noted that about 50 of the protesters arrested have entered guilty pleas. He also said that a much larger group that took part in the protest was allowed to disperse.
Fine added that in two trials, the juries that acquitted the defendants insisted on making public statements to the effect of praising the behavior of the police and the prosecution.
Should the city continue to prosecute DNC protesters?
November 13, 2008
11:43 AM
Ben-Former Democrat writes:
If the city can make money, I say fine them the maximum. If not, use the taxpayers money on prosections the City of Denver might find more important, like say arresting people for putting up Christmas decorations.
November 13, 2008
11:47 AM
DEMSBETTER writes:
So what are they going to do with the DPD agitators? I find it funny that the worst protesting was staged by the Police. Sorry this wasn't the riots and floods the GOP was praying for.
November 13, 2008
11:48 AM
LetsThink writes:
This is truly frustrating.
These anarchists disrupted and endangerer decent law-abiding citizens. The city incurred the huge expense of providing police protection for our behaved citizens.
And now these radicals are getting away with their crime, scott free. So they will obviously repeat their behavior in another city, in the future.
Why must society tolerate this behavior???
November 13, 2008
11:55 AM
DEMSBETTER writes:
LetsThink,
You may want to read this:
http://www.denverpost.com/ci_10920817?source=email
November 13, 2008
12:02 PM
DEMSBETTER writes:
LetsThink,
Q: "Why must society tolerate this behavior???"
A: The First Amendment of the Constitution.
Are you so worried about the second you forgot the first?
November 13, 2008
12:32 PM
Ben-Native American writes:
Demsbetter,
Without 2nd, there would be no 1st.
November 13, 2008
12:44 PM
DEMSBETTER writes:
Ben,
Without a 1st there would be no 2nd either, in fact there probably wouldn't be a Constitution. I don't have a problem with any part of the Constitution.
November 13, 2008
1:03 PM
Ben-Making Observations writes:
Dems,
Let me put it another way. Without the 2nd as insurance there wouldn't be the rest. Capeche?
November 13, 2008
1:15 PM
Shaggy writes:
You are dead on as always Ben.
Have you seen the buzz how guns are flying off the shelves ever since Obama became the President elect?
Obama has already tried before to suppress our second amendment.
He doesn't even acknowledge the Constitutions requirements to be eligible to be President.
Why should we trust him to uphold the Constitution?
btw tiny_d, looks like your conspiracy theory is evidently debunked now.
November 13, 2008
1:34 PM
Ben-Former Democrat writes:
Shaggy,
Thanks and yes I have noticed.
In pre-election fluff, Obama did say "We won't take away your shotguns" He didn't say "We won't take away your GUNS" Translated- Better get your butt to the gun shop and celebrate diversity, a diversity of guns that is.
November 13, 2008
1:35 PM
DEMSBETTER writes:
I don’t think your theory holds water Ben. India did it without guns and so did Jesus.
What conspiracy theory is that Saggy? India did it without guns. I don't think your theory is complete. I guess you can go cling to your weapons for a while now and fear ideas and speech some more.
November 13, 2008
1:46 PM
Ben-Former Democrat writes:
Dems,
India and Jesus did what without guns?
Hell, India has a nuke aimed at Pakistan.
I'm not India, and I'm not Jesus. Just a law abiding citizen who demands his and his countrymen's 2nd amendment rights not be infringed.
November 13, 2008
1:49 PM
DEMSBETTER writes:
Let’s see Jesus, Gandhi, Martin Luther, Martin Luther King, Siddhartha, Mohammed, etc. some of the most powerful people in history had nothing to do with the guns. I still appreciate having a gun because I hunt and don’t trust people like Shaggy but go try to change something with only a gun today and see how effective your theory is. It may work once if you live through it and your scope will probably be pretty limited. You may even find somebody with a bigger gun.
November 13, 2008
1:55 PM
DEMSBETTER writes:
“The pen is mightier than the sword”
November 13, 2008
1:57 PM
Shaggy writes:
tiny_d,
I was referring to your conspiracy theory that you are blocked.
Do you know what will happen if all the guns get taken away from your average law abiding good American?
Do you know what criminals fear most when invading someones property?
The second amendment was also created to help us protect ourselves against the Government or some crazy person who happens to become elected and decides he would like to become permanent dictator instead of President.
I am pretty sure guns were not invented when Jesus was roaming the Earth.
November 13, 2008
1:59 PM
DEMSBETTER writes:
"India and Jesus did what without guns?"
I need to go talk to a box of rocks so I can have a more intellectual exchange.
November 13, 2008
2:04 PM
Ben-Native American writes:
"Speak softly and carry a big stick"
Teddy Roosevelt
November 13, 2008
2:12 PM
Ben-Native American writes:
Shaggy, Dems and everybody,
This is what I am talking about. I think you will find it pretty convincing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxP_90LzuOQ
November 13, 2008
2:15 PM
SASQUATCH writes:
Time to get serious...
http://meanwhile.files.wordpress.com/2006/05/Electric-Chair.jpg
Like new, mint condition, used only twice before by Ethel and Julius.
November 13, 2008
2:26 PM
Ben writes:
"I need to go talk to a box of rocks so I can have a more intellectual exchange." Dems
This from a guy who spouts proudly "India did it without guns" meanwhile India has Nuke aimed at Pakistan.
Then you compound your ineptness with a smear on my intellectual capabilities.
That's what I get for dealing with the mentally challenged I guess.
Just watch the video I linked, stupid.
November 13, 2008
2:34 PM
Shaggy writes:
"You may even find somebody with a bigger gun"
Those who control the biggest gun controls you.
That is why I am glad and proud to be a American.
btw, I have always been proud...unlike a few other people who call themselves Americans.
Why do you think Iran is desperately seeking Nukes?
Why do you think the Romans ruled for so long?
"India and Jesus did what without guns?"
I am still waiting to hear what you are talking about.
Did they rule or control something w/o weapons?
Nice link Ben,
Too bad the sound goes out, at least on me, about four minutes into it.
But she did touch on what I said about the 2nd amendment being about enabling the people of the United States to protect ourselves against Government as well as someone who wants to violate your person or family..
Take away our right to bear arms and it is open season for the criminals to do as they please.
November 13, 2008
2:55 PM
JW writes:
Oh for fux sake. Listen to you morons.
"Without the second, you dont have the rest!"
Big tough guys with their fire arms! Clearly its guns that guarantee civil rights!
Right?
Well, if you take a look around the world, not so much.
England is doing quite well regarding civil rights. As is Ireland. Come to think of it...MOST of Europe is doing just as well or BETTER than the US in terms of upholding civil rights. What are the gun laws like over there tough guys?
Now, what about Afghanistan. They have more guns per capita than ANYWHERE on earth. How have they been doing on civil rights?
You people are idiots, pure and simple. You have a right to guns, but its no more important (and one could argue far LESS important) than any of the other rights in the constitution. Your idiotic insistance that A) it is the most important and B) your right to own guns is threatened is just proof of...your idiocy. Thats it. It doesnt make you cool like you seem to think. It sure as hell doesnt make you smart. It doesnt make you more patriotic than anyone else.
It makes you look stupid. Thats it.
November 13, 2008
2:55 PM
DEMSBETTER writes:
Jesus defeated the Roman Empire. Gandhi defeated the British Empire. They both won their freedoms without firing a shot.
Are you taunting me about being blocked on the other posts? I guess my pen is too much for you and the RMN.
Ben why are you so worried about what is going to happen? If it is that scary to have a Democrat in the Whitehouse you can leave. I tire with your constant fear mongering. I am not afraid.
November 13, 2008
3:00 PM
history buff writes:
the city's conviction record is 1-17
I think that is the same record Greg Smith, the guy the Rockies got in the trade for Matt Holliday, had last year with the Oakland A's.
November 13, 2008
3:03 PM
DEMSBETTER writes:
JW,
I think they cling to guns because they are compensating for other shortcomings ;)
November 13, 2008
3:18 PM
Shaggy writes:
Why is it that Liberals such as Obama and JW are in love with Socialist Europe and love to criticize the United States and Capitalism?
"what about Afghanistan. They have more guns per capita than ANYWHERE on earth. How have they been doing on civil rights?"
I guess JW wants to compare third world countries that are mostly ran by terrorists to gun control in the United States.
My god you are a f*#kwit. A stupid one at that.
November 13, 2008
3:20 PM
JW writes:
Dems,
I like my gun, no doubt. And the constitution guarantees I can have one.
The difference between me and those idiots is:
A) I dont think its my most important civil liberty, I put it equal with all the rest.
B) The supremes just said I can have one, and even the President cant take it away. Even if I was a freak like these guys and believed that Obama wanted to take my gun, I still wouldnt worry because I underand our system of government better than those uneducated slobs. He cant, even if he wanted to, which he doesnt.
C) I dont think my gun makes me able to stand up to the government like they seem to. They have some sort of insane belief that because they have guns they can protect their other civil liberties if the government infringes upon them. While that was probably true in the late 1700's (and not true even then unless they had time to organize) its sure as hell not true today. Witness unwarranted wiretapping. Witness the MCA of 06. And witness Afghanistan. All those idiots had guns, and our military kicked the crap out of them in 2 weeks. These were hardened battle trained jihadis. You think fat, bald, and out of shape Shaggy is going to give them a problem? Guy can use a hammer like a champ, but Im betting on the 22 year old with the M16. You think Benny, who is "In tip top shape at 9000ft" will give them a problem after his soft ass American life?
LOL!
I have a gun because I enjoy shooting, and if anyone is stupid enough to break in to my house with the alarm going nuts and the dog freaking out they are crazy, mean me or my loved ones harm, and need to die.
Other than that...I dont have delusions of grandure that owning a gun makes me into some kind of super freedom fighter willing and able to take on the US military. I dont feel like owning a gun is more important than being able to speak my mind, having the right to habeus corpus, having the right to a free press, having the right to chose my own religion, etc etc etc.
November 13, 2008
3:45 PM
history buff writes:
I entered a federal building this afternoon. There was a sign posted at the entrance announcing that it is a federal crime to carry a weapon into a federal building. Now, am I to understand that there are people who view this restraint somehow as an attempt to take away their guns? And that if Obama enforces this law, somehow he is violating the Constitution?
November 13, 2008
3:47 PM
JW writes:
"Why is it that Liberals such as Obama and JW are in love with Socialist Europe and love to criticize the United States and Capitalism?"
The wonderful thing about America, Shaggy, is that we were given room for IMPROVEMENT by the founding fathers. Thats why it says "in order to form a more perfect union" in the preamble to the constitution. The founding fathers set it up so that we, as Americans, could look at our country and decided what we thought needed to be changed, or improved. Then they gave us free speech and the vote to get it done.
Somewhere along the way (perhaps in the 50's, say around the time of McCarthy), SOME Americans started down the misguided path to "love it or leave it". They called this "Patriotism", but it has nothing to do with being an American patriot. A truely American patriot would live up to the responsibilities the founding fathers left us with: To form a MORE perfect union. A responsibility to argue for change in order to accomplish that more perfect union, and to vote accordingly.
What they did NOT do was say "You have to love America regardless and deal with the things you dont like in silence. You always have to say America is the best! Its perfect! To be a patriot."
Besides Shaggy, youve been telling us all how weak America is since Obama was elected. How pathetic. How bent on socialism and communism and wtfever your whacko right radio tells you. You really dont think that much of America anyway.
"I guess JW wants to compare third world countries that are mostly ran by terrorists to gun control in the United States."
Thats because you have no critical thinking skills Shaggy. Both you and Ben have argued that without guns, you cannot keep your civil liberties. I gave the example of Europe as refuting evidence because they have civil liberties without guns. I gave the example of Afghanistan as an example that guns in and of themselves do not guarantee liberties. If guns do not guarantee liberties, and liberties can be haad without guns, your argument that the second amendment is the most important because without that one we wont have the others is completely debunked.
"My god you are a f*#kwit. A stupid one at that."
Hehe. F*#kwit is fun huh?
November 13, 2008
3:53 PM
Shaggy writes:
"You think fat, bald, and out of shape Shaggy is going to give them a problem?"
I thought stereotyping is a no no in the Liberal world.
You couldn't be farther from the truth.
November 13, 2008
4:03 PM
JW writes:
"I thought stereotyping is a no no in the Liberal world.
You couldn't be farther from the truth."
Sigh. The description wasnt the point Shaggy. I have no idea what you look like, what kind of shape youre in, how much hair you have.
You could be in the best shape of your life and owning a gun STILL wouldnt make you a super freedom fighter ready and willing to take on the US military in an effort to protect your civil liberties!
You arent Patrick Swayze in "Red Dawn". None of us are.
November 13, 2008
4:27 PM
Shaggy writes:
I am just glad Liberals like to eat otherwise they would want us to live like those in Ethiopia.
Sorry F*#kwit's, this is America that was built on Capitalism.
If you love Socialism so much move to Sweden or some other Country you are in love with.
"Both you and Ben have argued that without guns, you cannot keep your civil liberties."
Guns are part of my liberties. If you take away my guns you just took away one of my liberties.
You make no sense what so ever.
You are the one who could use that critical thinking class!
If all parts of the Constitution are important to you like you have stated, how can you possibly support Obama when he is the one who wants to revise it?
btw, Patrick Swayze is a Hollywood liberal.
You are right, I am not him but I was raised in Wyoming and grew up clinging to my 2nd amendment and will continue to do so.
November 13, 2008
4:49 PM
Ben- Unstupid American writes:
Jw,
You are the one who does no critical thinking. You think using profanity and exclamations is somehow critical thinking. The more you type the stupider you reveal yourself. Typical most, not all of the liberals here. You obviously lack of quality female companionship.
History Buff @ 3:45,
Here is an parallel scenario to yours @3:45
If your aunt had balls she would be your uncle. jw, should be screaming through his keybooard for you to take a critical thinking class.
November 13, 2008
4:52 PM
JW writes:
Hehe, Shaggy what you are is a frothing at the mouth bad loser, and a tin foil hat wearing "any Republican will do, but any Democrat will ruin the country becuase its just THAT WEAK" fairweather American.
November 13, 2008
5:04 PM
Ben-- Native American writes:
jw,
Hey stupid, Obama has voted to restrict and end your 2nd amendment rights as a Senator, shamelessy and CONSISTENTLY. Pull your head out of you ass, or Obama's, preferably both.
November 13, 2008
5:36 PM
history buff writes:
If your aunt had balls she would be your uncle
???????
LOLOLOLOL. WTF?
If the federal government can restrain second amendment privileges on federal property, are there other areas where second amendment privileges can be restrained? On common carriers, such as airplanes, trains and buses?
And can the government prevent violent felons from owning or possessing fire arms? Can the government prevent wife beaters from owning fire arms? I think that second question is before the US Supreme Court.
You say that Obama has voted to restrict second amendment rights, but how? Do you have an example? Is the example the one I gave?
My example demonstrates that second amendment rights are not absolute. I'm merely asking, how far can the government go in restraining second amendment rights?
For people who are so worried about the government taking away your second amendment rights, you sure avoid a discussion. The rights guaranteed by the Constitution should be discussed in their application, but to throw out a totally absurd WACKO thing about human sexual organs is WEIRD, WEIRD, WEIRD. WEIRDO!!!!!!
November 13, 2008
5:58 PM
JW writes:
Ben,
Do you have a genetic defect? Thats about the only thing I can think of that would explain you. If so, sorry man, for all the times I was rude and called you names. Sincerely.
If not...
HEHE. Youre an outlier in the world of Darwin, just by still being alive.
November 13, 2008
6:43 PM
Ben writes:
HB, From the November 2008 American Rifleman cover:
Barack Obama on Gun Control
*Prosecute people who use guns for self defense in the home-YES
* Ban the sale of almost all hunting ammunition-YES
*Increase taxes on firearms and ammuntion by 500%.
YES
Then it goes into the Obama time line. Use your computer and look up Obama and gun control.
jw, I'm glad your meds have kicked in for you.
November 14, 2008
9:01 AM
Shaggy writes:
"Shaggy what you are is a frothing at the mouth bad loser, and a tin foil hat wearing "any Republican will do"
tisk tisk, stereotyping once again I see.
What did I tell you about that?
Ben,
I find it amazing JW comes back day after day for his ass whippings!
JW pisses and moans when Bush spied on terrorists yet he cannot look past his party and see that Obama wipes his ass with the constitution.
The man cub still has not produced documents meeting the requirements of the Constitution.
November 14, 2008
9:59 AM
Ben writes:
Shaggy, I agree totally.
November 18, 2008
5:12 PM
John MF Rambo writes:
Guns are manly. Being a gun lover is manly. Talking about the 2nd Amendment, without actually knowing what is says, is manly.
Everyone always knows and talks about guns. And they all know that the number of guns you have shows the number of inches of your manhood, in girth. Right now I have 47 guns. I am a man, and my sex organ is the size of a young Sequoya tree trunk.
Come January 1, I am going to shoot my guns on every day of the new year. That's 47 days of shooting at things. Our new president knows nothing. I also have an falcon-eagle. He owns several guns too. And every harvest moon he flies down and gives a gun to a non-believer, and we are all the better for it. No one has shot at my falcon-eagle yet. The newspaper took a photo of my falcon-eagle and used him for promotional reasons (check bottom right corner). Now hes got a big head. And at times I want to put him in his place by scaring him with a well placed gunshot. But then I remember how much I really like him, and how much money I'm going to get from selling his falcon-eagle feathers when he dies.
But back to the topic. I think we can all agree: (1) Guns. Great. Lets shoot them all a billion times. (2) Protesters. They all fling poop. If they wanted to be protected by the 1st Amendment, they should have done what any self respecting man would have done: run half-naked, huffing through the streets with their 47 guns and their eagle-falcon. Because that is the only way that President Obama, a Constitutional law professor, will understand the 1st and 2nd Amendments.