Jump to content

Typical Blue Bullshit


Recommended Posts

Create a problem by passing laws to decriminalize a  majority of crimes and let a lot of felons out of jail, have an instant tsunami of property of violent crime, and screech to the high heavens with the woke bullshite to de-fund the police, now they want to spend a shit load of money to fix it...  

Why not just leave well enough alone and get rid of the policies that created this in the first place.  Too fucking simple right?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/gavin-newsom-s-plan-to-stop-california-s-smash-and-grab-thefts-300m-for-local-law-enforcement/ar-AARWlKI?li=BBnbcA1

Of course, the usual suspects here will chime in with their usual bombastic bullshite...  blah, blah, blah,  save you breath, if you don't see something wrong here, then you're part of the problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Ventucky Red said:

Of course, the usual suspects here will chime in with their usual bombastic bullshite...  blah, blah, blah,

You seem to have taken care of that all by yourself.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ventucky Red said:

if you don't see something wrong here, then you're part of the problem.

it's not that I don't necessarily see something 'wrong' here, it's just that I know it can't be all that bad if the reFucklicans didn't pull it. yin and yang; the best thing about the dems is they aren't the  r e i c h, even utter mediocrity can start to look appealing if the alternative is malevolence.

I couldn't give a fkg rat turd about your 'outrage', right-winger.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ventucky Red said:

Create a problem by passing laws to decriminalize a  majority of crimes and let a lot of felons out of jail, have an instant tsunami of property of violent crime, and screech to the high heavens with the woke bullshite to de-fund the police, now they want to spend a shit load of money to fix it...  

Why not just leave well enough alone and get rid of the policies that created this in the first place.  Too fucking simple right?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/gavin-newsom-s-plan-to-stop-california-s-smash-and-grab-thefts-300m-for-local-law-enforcement/ar-AARWlKI?li=BBnbcA1

Of course, the usual suspects here will chime in with their usual bombastic bullshite...  blah, blah, blah,  save you breath, if you don't see something wrong here, then you're part of the problem.

Let's see. 

Did Democrats pass legislation to decriminalize a majority of crimes? 

No. 

Was there a "Tsunami" of crime following this imaginary decriminalization? 

No. 

Did defunding the police have anything to do with either of your imaginary events?

No. 

It would help if you attempted to use even a small bit of truth in your outraged rant of bullshit. 

The United States currently incarcerates more of their citizens than any other country.  Including regimes like China. This does not serve our population well.  Period. 

There were a series of riots in the United States directly caused police behavior, including a murder and blatant systemic long standing racism.

Police have grown increasingly militant, in many cases utilizing tactics like no knock warrants, property seizure without just cause, attempting forced pull over searches, and other methods that frankly are against the concepts of the constitution that folks like you hold up as the gold standard. 

So do the country a favor and grow the fuck up. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, chum said:

Sols only practice is bullshitting here, there's no way he does anything else but search for memes and Homer Simpson videos all day.

So your only contribution to this thread is a bullshit comment whinging about someone else's bullshit.  And your so stupid you can't see the irony in that, but you happily put your ignorance on display for everyone else to bask in.  Congratulations, fool. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Grrr... said:

Let's see. 

Did Democrats pass legislation to decriminalize a majority of crimes? 

No. 

Was there a "Tsunami" of crime following this imaginary decriminalization? 

No. 

Did defunding the police have anything to do with either of your imaginary events?

No. 

It would help if you attempted to use even a small bit of truth in your outraged rant of bullshit. 

The United States currently incarcerates more of their citizens than any other country.  Including regimes like China. This does not serve our population well.  Period. 

There were a series of riots in the United States directly caused police behavior, including a murder and blatant systemic long standing racism.

Police have grown increasingly militant, in many cases utilizing tactics like no knock warrants, property seizure without just cause, attempting forced pull over searches, and other methods that frankly are against the concepts of the constitution that folks like you hold up as the gold standard. 

So do the country a favor and grow the fuck up. 

 

V-cuck does have a point though.  Had it not be for CA's decriminalizing or making it a misdemeanor for any theft less than $950 where the Po-LEECE won't come if a store calls to report a theft..... that policy has essentially made that crime a non-event in the eyes of LE and incentivized gangs to take advantage of it.  

Personally, I think the CA citizens get exactly what they deserve.  If the majority of its citizens want this policy, they should get to enjoy it - warts and all.  Just think of it as wealth distribution from the rich to the poor.  Besides, Those dazzling urbanites need the cash more than the business owners do.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

V-cuck does have a point though.  Had it not be for CA's decriminalizing or making it a misdemeanor for any theft less than $950 where the Po-LEECE won't come if a store calls to report a theft..... that policy has essentially made that crime a non-event in the eyes of LE and incentivized gangs to take advantage of it.  

Personally, I think the CA citizens get exactly what they deserve.  If the majority of its citizens want this policy, they should get to enjoy it - warts and all.  Just think of it as wealth distribution from the rich to the poor.  Besides, Those dazzling urbanites need the cash more than the business owners do.  

So ,believe for responsibility, but not businesses?  Careful, we may agree on something.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

awesome rant 

How to Write a Rant: 15 Steps (with Pictures) - wikiHow

I strive for clarity and eloquence when someone needs to be bitch-slapped to hell and back.  I even use high brow punctuation like colons and semicolons.  Some might claim that makes me an insult snob; I merely prefer to be precise in pointing out dumbfuckery. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Grrr... said:

The United States currently incarcerates more of their citizens than any other country.  Including regimes like China. This does not serve our population well.  Period. 

I agree and have been waiting eagerly for Biden to fulfill his campaign promise. He was looking into the idea in August, so should be any day now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Grrr... said:

Let's see. 

Did Democrats pass legislation to decriminalize a majority of crimes? 

No. 

Was there a "Tsunami" of crime following this imaginary decriminalization? 

No. 

Did defunding the police have anything to do with either of your imaginary events?

No. 

It would help if you attempted to use even a small bit of truth in your outraged rant of bullshit. 

The United States currently incarcerates more of their citizens than any other country.  Including regimes like China. This does not serve our population well.  Period. 

There were a series of riots in the United States directly caused police behavior, including a murder and blatant systemic long standing racism.

Police have grown increasingly militant, in many cases utilizing tactics like no knock warrants, property seizure without just cause, attempting forced pull over searches, and other methods that frankly are against the concepts of the constitution that folks like you hold up as the gold standard. 

So do the country a favor and grow the fuck up. 

 

Let's see. 

Your question:  Did Democrats pass legislation to decriminalize a majority of crimes? 

Of course not.  They didn't need to.  When they decided that things like theft less than $1000 wouldn't be prosecuted no legislation was required. so, that point is pointless.

Now, since that is pointless your subsequent q/a is equally so.

There is an increase in crime.  "Tsunami" is just dumb use of a word.  Sure looks like if from local reporting.

https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/crime-rate-in-san-francisco-oakland-increased-this-year-data/

It looks like most places that were defunding their police forces are now increasing the funding to at least previous levels.  It may not show cause and effect but the indiication is certainly there that defunding was a failure of policy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Grrr... said:

Let's see. 

Did Democrats pass legislation to decriminalize a majority of crimes? 

No.  Yes, Proposition 47, 57, and AB 109 - google them.

Was there a "Tsunami" of crime following this imaginary decriminalization?  Yes, the problem has come so commonplace people don't even bother reporting them.  In places like Oakland and San Francisco people don't even bother to lock their cars anymore to save from having to replace a window.  Some of the higher-end neighborhoods are reverting to bared windows and fortified doors... 

Did defunding the police have anything to do with either of your imaginary events? No. Yes, the criminals know that fewer cops mean long response times, let alone being under scrutiny for everything they do.

It would help if you attempted to use even a small bit of truth in your outraged rant of bullshit. 

It would help if you really knew what the fuck you were talking about, but you don't.  Another blue team bullshiter

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Cal20sailor said:

So ,believe for responsibility, but not businesses?  Careful, we may agree on something.   

Can you translate that into english please.  I don't speak PUI that well this early on a Sunday.  TIA.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Lochnerian Tom said:

I agree and have been waiting eagerly for Biden to fulfill his campaign promise. He was looking into the idea in August, so should be any day now.

Yeah.  VERY disappointed.  I may have voted blue in this case, but I hold both sides to task for their promises.  In this case he's failing badly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Saorsa said:

Let's see. 

Your question:  Did Democrats pass legislation to decriminalize a majority of crimes? 

Of course not.  They didn't need to.  When they decided that things like theft less than $1000 wouldn't be prosecuted no legislation was required. so, that point is pointless.

Now, since that is pointless your subsequent q/a is equally so.

There is an increase in crime.  "Tsunami" is just dumb use of a word.  Sure looks like if from local reporting.

https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/crime-rate-in-san-francisco-oakland-increased-this-year-data/

It looks like most places that were defunding their police forces are now increasing the funding to at least previous levels.  It may not show cause and effect but the indiication is certainly there that defunding was a failure of policy.

This is a *blatent* lie Saorsa, and one that is worthy of your usual dog-like levels of bullshit.

They passed a law that changed the level of a FELONY from $400 to $950 when shoplifting.  Both levels will still be enforced.  Both will be prosecuted.  The police will still respond to calls of crime.

They did not decriminalize anything.  They changed the levels that result in mandatory prison / incarceration in an attempt to lower the total prison population, because stealing 4 pairs of levis should not result in the removal of one's right to vote and a trip to jail for a year or more.

Grow the fuck up.

As such, ALL of my responses still hold water and are still accurate.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Saorsa said:

Let's see. 

Your question:  Did Democrats pass legislation to decriminalize a majority of crimes? 

Of course not.  They didn't need to.  When they decided that things like theft less than $1000 wouldn't be prosecuted no legislation was required. so, that point is pointless.

Now, since that is pointless your subsequent q/a is equally so.

There is an increase in crime.  "Tsunami" is just dumb use of a word.  Sure looks like if from local reporting.

https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/crime-rate-in-san-francisco-oakland-increased-this-year-data/

It looks like most places that were defunding their police forces are now increasing the funding to at least previous levels.  It may not show cause and effect but the indiication is certainly there that defunding was a failure of policy.

Where do all you Trumpturds live? You sound fucking poor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Saorsa said:

they decided that things like theft less than $1000 wouldn't be prosecuted no legislation was required. so, that point is pointless.

Bad faith liar alert  . . 

This is not the first time you have been caught lying. 

How can you possibly expect anyone to take you seriously ?? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Lochnerian Tom said:

I agree and have been waiting eagerly for Biden to fulfill his campaign promise. He was looking into the idea in August, so should be any day now.

As far as I know he hasn't pardoned anyone yet.  This isn't the make-it-up-as-you-go Presidency of the last administration where they were only doled out to people who are loyal.  If there is indeed thousands of pardons to be given, he needs the Office of Pardon Attorney to do his job.  Be mad at him.  And I can only imagine how you and the Joke (and by proxy, Jizzy) will freak the fuck out if ONE single pardon is given to a person who runs a red light sometime in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Grrr... said:

This is a *blatant* lie Saorsa, and one that is worthy of your usual dog-like levels of bullshit.

They passed a law that changed the level of a FELONY from $400 to $950 when shoplifting for all theft.  Both levels will still be enforced.  You can only enforce what is being reported, people don't bother anymore because they know nothing is going to happen and face possible retribution for the perp.   Both will be prosecuted. No they won't, the George Soros puppet DAs' don't even file on a majority of this shit. The police will still respond to calls of crime. In most cases, they don't. They tell you to go online a file a report and they'll assign it a case number for your insurance purposes and call you if you have any questions.  If a mall cop apprehended someone, then yes, they'll show up.

They did not decriminalize anything.  Actually, they did by enacting the policies they have. 

It is not a blatant lie, it is the reality. 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ventucky Red said:

It is not a blatant lie, it is the reality. 

 

 

 

Ya know, I remember a previous poster that used to like putting his typing inside the quote boxes because he knew it didn't get quoted that way.  Interesting, eh?

I mean - your logic is more full of holes than Donald Trump's latest blow up doll.

You're finding anecdotal stories told by someone with an agenda to some reporter on a biased web site trying to push a political view and then trying to apply them to the general public.  Your reasoning is as faulty as a reused condom, and the person using the condom is far more intelligent than you.

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article256384112.html

Well damn.  Imagine that.  And after looking around, I see that it's a bunch of republicans (looking for election points go figure) who decided to start blabbing about this.  Only SEVEN FUCKING YEARS after it was passed.  Yet it's only just now that they can suddenly claim these changes.... why?  Even when the evidence show in the aftermath of proposition, reporting of crimes actually INCREASED?

Could it be because unemployment benefits and extra benefits from covid, along with federal government payouts and ending, so people are moving to theft to make ends meet?  And that the sudden bump in thefts provide a perfect scapegoat for people like sucktucky?  Naaaaaaaaa.

Nope.  Sucktucky is of the ilk who still believe steadily increasing prison time and the severity of penalties will stop people from committing crimes - in direct opposition to every bit of evidence out there.  He doesn't understand that the root cause of crime isn't evil people - it's desperate people.  And the more you screw over people, the more desperate they get.

Sorry Sucktucky.  You're on the wrong side of facts and the wrong side of history.  And despite your histrionics, and those of the handful of reds you're parroting, recent votes have reinforced that the vast majority of Californians support reducing penalties.  Not increasing.  Even in the face of this devastating but imaginary tidal wave of make believe crime.  And it's totally unsurprising that the amount of data and factual support you've provided to your fanciful claims have been exactly as many facts as your right-side handlers have put out when they've made their dubious statements:  exactly zero.

Isn't it really annoying how difficult it is to find factual data to support made up bullshit?  But keep up the good fight.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, roundthebuoys said:
21 hours ago, Lochnerian Tom said:

I agree and have been waiting eagerly for Biden to fulfill his campaign promise. He was looking into the idea in August, so should be any day now.

As far as I know he hasn't pardoned anyone yet.  This isn't the make-it-up-as-you-go Presidency of the last administration where they were only doled out to people who are loyal.  If there is indeed thousands of pardons to be given, he needs the Office of Pardon Attorney to do his job.  Be mad at him.  And I can only imagine how you and the Joke (and by proxy, Jizzy) will freak the fuck out if ONE single pardon is given to a person who runs a red light sometime in the future.

He pardoned two turkeys, so we know that he knows how to do it. Whatabout Trump? Don't care about Trump, he didn't make the campaign promise. Biden did. Whatabout some nameless underling? Don't care about nameless underlings. None of them made the campaign promise. Biden did. And I can only imagine how you and your elk will freak out if you ever visit the thread about red light cameras. WTF does that have to do with anything?

Fact is, he's a career drug warrior and old habits die hard. There's no pardon attorney working in the background. There's no motivation to do so because the boss is a career drug warrior. Same reason Merrick Garland won't undo what Trump did on drug war looting: it's the boss' legacy.

Maybe one day we'll have a President who isn't a career drug warrior. I remain hopeful, as I have for decades now, but also remain realistic and there's a good chance my fellow Americans will continue to elect drug warriors for the rest of my life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/19/2021 at 7:21 AM, Grrr... said:

Police have grown increasingly militant, in many cases utilizing tactics like no knock warrants, property seizure ….

Yes, the police and certain politicians that pander to a certain racist/scared/supremest voting bloc declared their various wars. Well, who would have guessed? They got the wars they wanted. They have not won a single one.

It is not the welfare. It is the wars. Time to surrender?

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, El Borracho said:
On 12/18/2021 at 6:21 PM, Grrr... said:

Police have grown increasingly militant, in many cases utilizing tactics like no knock warrants, property seizure ….

Yes, the police and certain politicians that pander to a certain racist/scared/supremest voting bloc declared their various wars. Well, who would have guessed? They got the wars they wanted. They have not won a single one.

It is not the welfare. It is the wars. Time to surrender?

Heck no! Do you know what kinds of racist nutjobs oppose no-knocks, property looting, and mandatory minimums??? The wise approach is to elect a career drug warrior as President and make sure someone in the White House opposes those nutjobs!

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Ventucky Red said:

It is not a blatant lie, it is the reality. 

 

 

 

 

Errr...hang on a tic...it appears Grrr is absolutely correct.  

 

CLAIM: Under Proposition 47 in California thefts under $950 will not be prosecuted.

AP ASSESSMENT: False. Proposition 47 was passed in California in 2014 and reclassified felony theft offenses as misdemeanors. It did not allow shoplifting and petty theft to go unprosecuted.

THE FACTS: The false claim about the proposition circulated on social media with a video showing two individuals walking out of a T.J. Maxx in Granada Hills, California, with duffle bags filled with merchandise and their arms filled with clothing on hangers. No one attempted to stop the pair as they walked out of the store and through the parking lot.

The scene was captured on video by another person in the store and circulated widely on news media.

Adam Carolla, a comedian who hosts a podcast, posted the video to Facebook along with a false comment about Proposition 47. “Thanks to Prop 47 thefts under $950 will not be prosecuted,” Carolla commented on the post. “So cops will not bother showing up. Just a reminder that you get what you voted for, California!”

But the post is incorrect. The 2014 proposition modified, but did not eliminate, sentencing for many nonviolent property and drug crimes.

“What Prop 47 did was take very low level crimes like petty theft, some petty drug offenses, petty larceny, and classify them as misdemeanors rather than felonies,” said Charis Kubrin, professor of criminology, law and society at the University of California, Irvine, who wrote a study examining the impact of the proposition on crime rates. “It doesn’t mean, like that Facebook post is saying, that you’re not prosecuted or that you aren’t committing a crime.” According to Alex Bastian, special advisor to Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón who co-authored Prop 47, most shoplifting was already prosecuted as a misdemeanor anyway.

“What Prop 47 did is increase the dollar amount by which theft can be prosecuted as a felony from $400 to $950 to adjust for inflation and cost of living,” Bastian said. “But most shoplifting cases are under $400 dollars to begin with, so before Prop 47 and after Prop 47, there isn’t any difference.” 

Proposition 47 was enacted to comply with a 2011 California Supreme Court order, which upheld that California’s overcrowded prisons violated incarcerated individuals’ Eighth Amendment rights against cruel and unusual punishment. “In 2011, our prisons were bursting at the seams, and California was ranked either first or second behind Texas as having the highest per capita incarceration rate of any state in the country,” Kubrin said. “It was so bad that the Supreme Court stepped in and told us we needed to reduce our prison population by 33,000 individuals.”

 

Wasn't the Governor of California Republican until 2011?

I lean right, and in as much as I hope for even a wee glimmer of sanity and rational thought on Americas right, all you come across these days are complete and utter lying, hypocritical, angry, small minded, dumb fucks.

Unbelievable. Did someone randomly poison the water sources over there? 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

He Was Sentenced To 110 Years in Prison for Causing a Fatal Traffic Accident. The Judge Isn't Happy About It.

Virtually all of these mandatory minimum sentencing stories involve the stupid drug war, but not this one.
 

Quote

 

A judge sentenced a Colorado man to 110 years in prison Monday. He was on trial for causing an accident in 2019: His truck brakes failed, and he crashed into traffic on the interstate, ultimately killing four people.

In October, the jury found Rogel Aguilera-Mederos, now 26, guilty of 27 counts in relation to the accident, including four counts of vehicular manslaughter, six counts of assault in the first degree, and 10 counts of attempt to commit assault in the first degree. He was acquitted on an additional 15 counts.

Though prosecutors conceded that Aguilera-Mederos' brakes stopped working, they argued that he was at fault for the mechanical defect. "There's only two ways this can go: either the defendant didn't catch it like he was supposed to or the defendant drove on his brakes the entire way and caused them to be that way," said Deputy District Attorney Kayla Wildeman, according to a local NBC affiliate. She also told the jury that the driver had failed to mitigate the truck's failure by not taking an off-ramp when he had the chance: "He saw that ramp….He looked at it and said I can baby this down the hill. I can get this down and so he goes past it. And it's not until he sees the traffic that he realizes, 'Oh, crap.' He made a choice. He chose to pass that."

...

 

The defense says that's not the way it happened, but let's assume it's completely accurate. 110 years?
 

Quote

 

...

Regardless of whether that's what happened, many will balk at the idea that a man has been sentenced to die in prison for a crime that the state admits was not maliciously intentioned. Among those detractors: Judge A. Bruce Jones, who sentenced Aguilera-Mederos.

"I will state that if I had the discretion, it would not be my sentence," he said Monday, noting that Colorado law requires Aguilera-Mederos to serve some of his sentences consecutively instead of concurrently.

"This is not the first time we've seen or heard a judge say, 'I'm bound by a mandatory sentence that I wouldn't give if I had discretion,'" says Kevin Ring, president of Families Against Mandatory Minimums. "I think that should bother everybody."

...

 

Judge Jones and Kevin Ring are right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/18/2021 at 12:59 PM, Ventucky Red said:

Create a problem by passing laws to decriminalize a  majority of crimes and let a lot of felons out of jail, have an instant tsunami of property of violent crime, and screech to the high heavens with the woke bullshite to de-fund the police, now they want to spend a shit load of money to fix it...  

Why not just leave well enough alone and get rid of the policies that created this in the first place.  Too fucking simple right?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/gavin-newsom-s-plan-to-stop-california-s-smash-and-grab-thefts-300m-for-local-law-enforcement/ar-AARWlKI?li=BBnbcA1

Of course, the usual suspects here will chime in with their usual bombastic bullshite...  blah, blah, blah,  save you breath, if you don't see something wrong here, then you're part of the problem.

What part of the threat of jail time does not prevent crime don't you understand?

You have to use a "glamorous" national news event, I prefer my personal experience.

My oldest daughter went to prom with a kid from Sarosa and Jules upper middleclass waterfront subdivision.  He seemed like a good young man (She came home with her prom dress intact).  His folks died and left him enough so that he did not have to work.  But somehow, he copped an attitude towards the kid that worked in the 7-11 down the street.  He shot him and tried to burn down the store.

He now lives in the Raifrord Hotel for 20 to life.

He knew what the consequences would be and did it anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Grrr... said:

Could it be because unemployment benefits and extra benefits from covid, along with federal government payouts and ending, so people are moving to theft to make ends meet?  And that the sudden bump in thefts provide a perfect scapegoat for people like sucktucky?  Naaaaaaaaa.

Your example is bullshit and you know it.  And yet, just about everywhere I go I am seeing help wanted signs.  I know, who wants to work for minimum wage right? 

Let me guess, white turtleneck sweater, a bottle of Harvey's Bristol Cream, and a laminated copy of the "what sort of man reads Playboy" on your nightstand to remind yourself who you are every day... a fraud.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, shaggybaxter said:

 

Errr...hang on a tic...it appears Grrr is absolutely correct. 

Under Prop 47 I can beat the shit out of you and leave you maimed and get what a year and a day in county jail?  Meanwhile, you're sipping your meals through a straw and peeing into a bag for the rest of your life. 

Oh!  Did you read AB 109 by chance?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ventucky Red said:

Under Prop 47 I can beat the shit out of you and leave you maimed and get what a year and a day in county jail?  Meanwhile, you're sipping your meals through a straw and peeing into a bag for the rest of your life. 

Oh!  Did you read AB 109 by chance?

You'll have to forgive sucktucky.  He doesn't actually READ factual links.  He just leaps to conclusions that he likes and then makes up shit about them to try to scare people.

Prop 47

Proposition 47 implemented three broad changes to felony sentencing laws. First, it reclassified certain theft and drug possession offenses from felonies to misdemeanors. Second, it authorizes defendants currently serving sentences for felony offenses that would have qualified as misdemeanors under the proposition to petition courts for resentencing under the new misdemeanor provisions. Third, it authorizes defendants who have completed their sentences for felony convictions that would have qualified as misdemeanors under the proposition to apply to reclassify those convictions to misdemeanors.

It doesn't let you 'beat the shit out of me and leave me maimed and get a year and a day in jail".  In fact, considering 'beating the shit out of me' is neither theft, nor drug posession (though I think we're all wondering about you and drugs at this point), it's pretty clear YOU have no fucking idea what you are talking about.

Oh yeah... prop 109.  Maybe your brain just had a seizure and that's what you meant.  The one that I already POSTED here, but you evidently don't care for the exact definition so you're resorting to "did you read it?  Did you read it?"  so let's read about prop 109 that sucktucky is so outraged about.

In April 2011, the California Legislature and Governor Brown passed sweeping public safety legislation (AB 109) that effectively shifted responsibility for certain populations of offenders from the state to the counties. Assembly Bill 109 establishes the California Public Safety Realignment Act of 2011 which allows for current non-violent, non-serious, and non-sex offenders, who after they are released from California State prison, are to be supervised at the local County level. Instead of reporting to state parole officers, these offenders are to report to local county probation officers.

Well shit.  That certainly looks..... uh..... um.... wait.   It didn't change much of anything.  Well damn.  Let's see..... non-violent, non-serious.  I guess YOU have a different definition of 'beating the shit out of someone and maiming the' than I do.

Jesus man.  Grow up.  Read a little.  Stop with the drugs.

Do you even live in California?  Or anywhere else close by?  Because you are gloriously fucking clueless about the actual laws, and I'm wondering what Republican shitshow has your panties so twisted.

Is it Tucker and Faux?  OAN?  Come on, give us a little hint.  Or are you on a facebook meme kick where you just read and believe everything?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Prop 47 doesn't reduce penalties for violent crimes. It applies to non-serious, nonviolent crime.

The stated purpose of the proposition is to “ensure that prison spending is focused on violent and serious offenses, to maximize alternatives for non-serious, nonviolent crime, and to invest the savings generated from [the proposition] into prevention and support programs in K-12 schools, victim services, and mental health and drug treatment” and to ensure “that sentences for people convicted of dangerous crimes like rape, murder, and child molestation are not changed.” The proposition states that it “shall be liberally construed to effectuate its purposes.”

https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/Prop47FAQs.pdf

AB 109 doesn't apply to violent crimes either.

https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/laws/ab-109/

We regret the confusion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Prop 47 doesn't reduce penalties for violent crimes. It applies to non-serious, nonviolent crime.

The stated purpose of the proposition is to “ensure that prison spending is focused on violent and serious offenses, to maximize alternatives for non-serious, nonviolent crime, and to invest the savings generated from [the proposition] into prevention and support programs in K-12 schools, victim services, and mental health and drug treatment” and to ensure “that sentences for people convicted of dangerous crimes like rape, murder, and child molestation are not changed.” The proposition states that it “shall be liberally construed to effectuate its purposes.”

https://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/Prop47FAQs.pdf

AB 109 doesn't apply to violent crimes either.

https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/laws/ab-109/

We regret the confusion.

You know this will just add to his confusion, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

You know this will just add to his confusion, right?

Yeah, it's stupid but we get a lot of it. These morans were blaming the entire homeless crisis on this one LA supervisor.  They were doing the same thing with a city council member up in Seattle. The Newsom recall was a bunch of nonsense, expensive nonsense. This is the petition:

https://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/recalls/newsom-notice-of-intent.pdf

They're amping up the nonsense for these recalls because they're their best shot locally. They scored with the Gray Davis recall. That was a monumentally stupid recall because they were blaming him for what Pete Wilson did. But it was Darrell Issa's one big chance (before Schwarzenegger decided to run, on the set of the Tonight Show).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Yeah, it's stupid but we get a lot of it. These morans were blaming the entire homeless crisis on this one LA supervisor.  They were doing the same thing with a city council member up in Seattle. The Newsom recall was a bunch of nonsense, expensive nonsense. This is the petition:

https://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/recalls/newsom-notice-of-intent.pdf

They're amping up the nonsense for these recalls because they're their best shot locally. They scored with the Gray Davis recall. That was a monumentally stupid recall because they were blaming him for what Pete Wilson did. But it was Darrell Issa's one big chance (before Schwarzenegger decided to run, on the set of the Tonight Show).

Considering that California Republicans are (on average) nuttier, further right, more destructive, and less inclined to be found inside the confines of legality, I strongly suggest to the California Democratic Party that they use the exact same tactic. File recall petitions against every single Repub in office, and against any that win any future elections.

Hoist them with their own petard.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

A couple of suggestions:

Broaden your news sources

Stop listening to people who are lying to you.

Consider anger management

Boudreauxs Butt Paste. 

apply where needed.

In other words, act like you have some goddam common sense instead of being dumber than the average doorknob.

Problem: people who are smart enough to take this advice don't need it.

- DSK

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Considering that California Republicans are (on average) nuttier, further right, more destructive, and less inclined to be found inside the confines of legality, I strongly suggest to the California Democratic Party that they use the exact same tactic. File recall petitions against every single Repub in office, and against any that win any future elections.

Hoist them with their own petard.

- DSK

California Republicans don't/can't win statewide and don't win local outside of red counties. They're a superminority at 31-9 in the Senate and 80-19 in the House. It 42-11 in the Congressional delegation. Democrats occupy all of the statewide offices. Consequently, the recall is their weapon of choice. Yes, CA Republicans are nutty. That's why they lose elections. BTW, their one prayer for a statewide office, former mayor of SD Kevin Falconer, got crushed by a radio talk show host. He was at best only a prayer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Yeah, it's stupid but we get a lot of it. These morans were blaming the entire homeless crisis on this one LA supervisor.  They were doing the same thing with a city council member up in Seattle. The Newsom recall was a bunch of nonsense, expensive nonsense. This is the petition:

https://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/recalls/newsom-notice-of-intent.pdf

They're amping up the nonsense for these recalls because they're their best shot locally. They scored with the Gray Davis recall. That was a monumentally stupid recall because they were blaming him for what Pete Wilson did. But it was Darrell Issa's one big chance (before Schwarzenegger decided to run, on the set of the Tonight Show).

Oh, I like the level of insanity in California.  It makes for good entertainment.  One of their city council woman Nury Martinez, proposed using their traffic cameras to take photos of license plates of people who drove in areas frequented by protitutes and automatically send letters to people who drove in those areas to accuse them of hiring said prostitutes.  There were quotes, there were news articles, it was all very clear what she wanted.  So it got posted on Wikipedia under her name.  Oddly, it kept being removed.  So I made it a personal duty to keep putting it back.

And, as luck would have it, Wikipedia is nice enough to make the IP address of the editors public.  So it was pretty easy to see that the IP address belonged to someone in her office.  Wild, eh?  So, I pointed out that it was a breach of wikipedia terms and conditions for people with a conflict of interest to repeatedly edit entries.  And they stopped.  And then they started again, the ip address had been removed and replaced by a user ID.

Well, guess what!  The ID was again obvious, because it was linked to the email address for her 'personal news management professional' that worked in her office.

So, I again restored the page.  And I again pointed out that She and her co-workers were knowing breakly the Wikipedia terms of service by intentionally lieing on her web page to remove damaging materials.  Other editors got involved restoring the information as well, and links to pdfs of the news articles were included.

Then she got elected to the council president.  And I said fuck it.  If the idiots want someone like that elected, then they really don't care if she randomly accuses spouses of hiring prostitutes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I fucking hated red light cameras. They're mostly gone now although they're still up in Redding. One of the companies that ran them, Redflex, bribed local officials. Ex-GF got nicked for $1000 for rolling a light going onto a freeway onramp.

License plate tracking (which are different from red light cameras) started in West Germany when they were tracking the Baader-Meinhof Gang.

https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/west-german-law-enforcement-intelligence-analysis-and-reaction-to-the-red-army-faction

Given a raspberry-pi, it's trivial technology today.

https://towardsdatascience.com/i-built-a-diy-license-plate-reader-with-a-raspberry-pi-and-machine-learning-7e428d3c7401

Using license plate trackng to cut down on prostitution is stupid. Otherwise she seems reasonable. She did get chosen as President of the Board of Supes; so she can't be a complete asshole. True, I'm left of center; so I'm inclined to give her a pass. But it is a dumb idea even if it was only proposed.

Besides, my favorite taco truck is at International+22nd. I've literally waited in line behind hookers for, you know, like 15 minutes. I'd totally get caught frequenting the area.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Olsonist said:

California Republicans don't/can't win statewide and don't win local outside of red counties. They're a superminority at 31-9 in the Senate and 80-19 in the House. It 42-11 in the Congressional delegation. Democrats occupy all of the statewide offices. Consequently, the recall is their weapon of choice. Yes, CA Republicans are nutty. That's why they lose elections. BTW, their one prayer for a statewide office, former mayor of SD Kevin Falconer, got crushed by a radio talk show host. He was at best only a prayer.

That's not my point.

They want to weaponize the recall process, fine. Ram it back down their throats and make them regret it, and make them NOT do it any more.

The big problem we have here is that Republicans all over the country are determined that they shall not suffer a Democrat to rule over them. That's how they see it. It's not government of the people, by the people, for the people... it's fucking things up unless Team R! gets to be on top.

They have to back down and agree to be citizens, to rejoin "we the people," or suffer the fucking consequences.

The danger here is that doing this kind of thing will put the same kind of rats & inhuman monsters in charge of the Democratic Party that have taken over the Republicans. Then we're really fucked.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Lochnerian Tom said:

He pardoned two turkeys, so we know that he knows how to do it. Whatabout Trump? Don't care about Trump, he didn't make the campaign promise. Biden did. Whatabout some nameless underling? Don't care about nameless underlings. None of them made the campaign promise. Biden did. And I can only imagine how you and your elk will freak out if you ever visit the thread about red light cameras. WTF does that have to do with anything?

Fact is, he's a career drug warrior and old habits die hard. There's no pardon attorney working in the background. There's no motivation to do so because the boss is a career drug warrior. Same reason Merrick Garland won't undo what Trump did on drug war looting: it's the boss' legacy.

Maybe one day we'll have a President who isn't a career drug warrior. I remain hopeful, as I have for decades now, but also remain realistic and there's a good chance my fellow Americans will continue to elect drug warriors for the rest of my life.

I'm 100% sure this lady is going to work doing something, with Kamala looking over her shoulder on dope offenses. 

https://www.justice.gov/pardon/staff-profile/meet-acting-pardon-attorney 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, roundthebuoys said:

I'm 100% sure this lady is going to work doing something, with Kamala looking over her shoulder on dope offenses. 

https://www.justice.gov/pardon/staff-profile/meet-acting-pardon-attorney 

I hope you're right. This part of the FAQ page wasn't encouraging to me.

Quote

 

What is the Biden Home Confinement Expedited Screening?

President Biden is exploring the use of his clemency power for individuals on home confinement under the CARES Act for non-violent drug offenses. 

 

 
He's quite the explorer, coming up on a year on that adventure now.
 
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, roundthebuoys said:

Sheesh, did you make his priority list for him?  He's working on it man.

He made the campaign promise. While I've been caught using my awesome mind control powers here to make other posters say stuff, I swear I haven't done this to the President.

I see no evidence he's working on fulfilling his promise. Evidence, fwiw, would look like this, from the relevant thread:

On 12/20/2021 at 5:27 AM, Lochnerian Tom said:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...