daddyo

As someone else has said before - play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

By making it personal and getting angry, you just lost the argument.

You assume a lot. I don't consider all cops thugs, but there are some who fit that description. That is a fact. Maybe he committed no crime at all. Seems to me that if he had, it would have said so in the article.

What else can you infer from it given the information that is there? What crime did he commit?

Maybe not, but until the whole story is out, it appears that he was beaten by a bunch of thugs with badges and guns.

You obviously have information the rest of us don't have then.

Sounds like a grand conspiracy theory to me...

So, having past "run-ins" with the police justify a beating? Nowhere in the article does it say he was intoxicated or was there any evidence that he had imbibed, but "assume" all you like.

If I'm gonna be smacked with french fries, I want them to be from Five Guys!!!

As much as I despise the Islamic "faith" because of its clear vendetta on "infidels", there are no exclusions from 1st Amendment protections for anyone who practices a religion that is bellicose in nature and generally anti-American. It is fact that sharia law has already taken hold in some European countries, usurping the existing laws. Look at what's happening in Minnesota for a taste of what could happen to the entire country in a matter of years. They are proving that their religious laws trump commerce regardless of any economic impact. This is exactly why Arab countries are still underdeveloped and why they hate the free market system, subsequently the American way of life, which is built on capitalism. Maybe it's time for an amendment to the Constitution regarding Islam because of the serious and real threat it poses to the American way of life.

This is a perfect example of someone who should not own a gun. I'm betting that if the guy had cut another one, he would be wounded or dead.

Nice work, Aaron!

Felony charges for throwing french fries at someone? The end is near.

Or in junior's Pull Ups.

Still waiting for them to catch their first terrorist....

Ah, yes.... Catherine Bell, the only reason I watched JAG.

Every single buyback I have read about always ended the same way: all firearms turned in were destroyed.

And unfortunately, there are too many people who are completely comfortable with that.

Ah,OK, I wasn't thinking in that context (even though that's the premise of the OP). I stand corrected. Thanks for being patient with an old man.

To me, the RKBA is just that... a right, and not a privilege. Driving is a privilege. Constitutionally speaking, the state's permission to carry a firearm for self-protection is not required. It is enumerated in the Bill of Rights as God-given and the government, according to that document, is not allowed to infringe on it. Requiring a citizen to pay the government and be subjected to scrutiny before exercising that right is a violation of the Constitution on the part of the government. That's my take on it and why I posed the question. The government would like for you to believe that it's a privilege. Don't fall for it.

“ . . . People criticize, sometimes, these events. They say we don’t get the right guns off the street, but the likelihood of these guns being turned in by somebody’s parent is much greater than being turned in by one of the gang-bangers.†Doh!!

Just another day in America under oppressive and unnecessary government regulations...

And liberals continue to claim that their government really does care about them.

Surely you guys aren't expecting the gummit to do something that actually makes sense.