If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
The Meth Debate Continues
Greegor wrote:
Would you mind posting your proof? That you're an intellectual prostitute, a shill? What was it you said? Notice you had to abort my words to have your stupid response? Just weaseling again, aren't you Greg? Basically you want the same kind of conversation that the nutsos run here to divert from any challenges to your stupidity I put to you. You don't have any proof. You just run off at the mouth, presuming you'll be taken seriously. No facts. No logic. Lies. Dodges. Keep it up Greg. All this is here for any future posters coming here for help to see before they accept any of your stupid dangerous advice. 0:- -- "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The Meth Debate Continues
Is this WHINEY?
Kane wrote Would you mind posting your proof? Greg wrote That you're an intellectual prostitute, a shill? Kane wrote What was it you said? Notice you had to abort my words to have your stupid response? Just weaseling again, aren't you Greg? Basically you want the same kind of conversation that the nutsos run here to divert from any challenges to your stupidity I put to you. You don't have any proof. You just run off at the mouth, presuming you'll be taken seriously. No facts. No logic. Lies. Dodges. Keep it up Greg. All this is here for any future posters coming here for help to see before they accept any of your stupid dangerous advice. What stupid dangerous advice are you talking about? Do you mean telling people NOT to let the caseworker search their home, insisting on a WARRANT, etc? Insisting on constitutional right against unreasonable search and seizure is dangerous HOW? For WHO? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The Meth Debate Continues
"Greegor" wrote in message ups.com... Is this WHINEY? Kane wrote Would you mind posting your proof? Greg wrote That you're an intellectual prostitute, a shill? Kane wrote What was it you said? Notice you had to abort my words to have your stupid response? Just weaseling again, aren't you Greg? Basically you want the same kind of conversation that the nutsos run here to divert from any challenges to your stupidity I put to you. You don't have any proof. You just run off at the mouth, presuming you'll be taken seriously. No facts. No logic. Lies. Dodges. Keep it up Greg. All this is here for any future posters coming here for help to see before they accept any of your stupid dangerous advice. What stupid dangerous advice are you talking about? Do you mean telling people NOT to let the caseworker search their home, insisting on a WARRANT, etc? Insisting on constitutional right against unreasonable search and seizure is dangerous HOW? For WHO? A warrant is not something that a case manager is going to have gregg. Law Enforcement, yes, but not case managers. If you insist on a warrant when a law enforcement officer arrives at your door be prepared to get stepped on as he goes through the door. As long as he has a reasonable belief that a crime is being committed a warrant is not required. THAT has been the law for some years now, in case you were not aware of it. Ron |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The Meth Debate Continues
Greegor wrote:
Is this WHINEY? Kane wrote Would you mind posting your proof? Greg wrote That you're an intellectual prostitute, a shill? Kane wrote What was it you said? Notice you had to abort my words to have your stupid response? Just weaseling again, aren't you Greg? Basically you want the same kind of conversation that the nutsos run here to divert from any challenges to your stupidity I put to you. You don't have any proof. You just run off at the mouth, presuming you'll be taken seriously. No facts. No logic. Lies. Dodges. Keep it up Greg. All this is here for any future posters coming here for help to see before they accept any of your stupid dangerous advice. What stupid dangerous advice are you talking about? You haven't read my posts by you have decided what I mean? Do you mean telling people NOT to let the caseworker search their home, insisting on a WARRANT, etc? Where did I say that? Insisting on constitutional right against unreasonable search and seizure is dangerous HOW? For WHO? Now you suddenly have morphed YOUR questions into presumptions of what I mean. Where have I told you to not offer that advice? In fact, I've discussed here exactly the same thing myself, offering advice, including citations to authoritative sources on HOW TO GO ABOUT DOING THAT MOST EFFECTIVELY. You simply want to FIGHT. One doesn't need to fight to deal with the state at your door. Not at the opening. And that's where you screw things up, don't you Greg? And now you are back to lying about me. Anyone with a memory who has been here long enough knows that I've never advocated anything other than smart handling of the "people at the door." And I have pointed out that telling CRIMINALS THAT ABUSE THEIR CHILDREN how to do that has a price to pay. That is how democracy works. It is not perfect. It's best features can have bad outcomes. You folks them blame CPS for what they must do. Lawfully. Dim bulbs. Everything must be black or white, but you'll use the gray to make your wild ranting claims. CPS can't get in, but you'll blame them if a child dies where they could NOT. Stupid little ****s. That's all you are. The pack of you. 0:- -- "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else) |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
The Meth Debate Continues
Ron wrote:
"Greegor" wrote in message ups.com... Is this WHINEY? Kane wrote Would you mind posting your proof? Greg wrote That you're an intellectual prostitute, a shill? Kane wrote What was it you said? Notice you had to abort my words to have your stupid response? Just weaseling again, aren't you Greg? Basically you want the same kind of conversation that the nutsos run here to divert from any challenges to your stupidity I put to you. You don't have any proof. You just run off at the mouth, presuming you'll be taken seriously. No facts. No logic. Lies. Dodges. Keep it up Greg. All this is here for any future posters coming here for help to see before they accept any of your stupid dangerous advice. What stupid dangerous advice are you talking about? Do you mean telling people NOT to let the caseworker search their home, insisting on a WARRANT, etc? Insisting on constitutional right against unreasonable search and seizure is dangerous HOW? For WHO? A warrant is not something that a case manager is going to have gregg. Law Enforcement, yes, but not case managers. Patience, Ron. Forbearance. Greg is a victim of the deliberate fogging of the lines between civil and criminal actions by the propagandists. He can't, and likely does not want to, sort out the reality. If you insist on a warrant when a law enforcement officer arrives at your door be prepared to get stepped on as he goes through the door. What the propagandists try to foist here is that most all child abuse complaints are not valid. The fact is most come with considerable evidence and claims and willingness to testify to it, that the child IS in immediate risk and danger. Many states routinely hook up CPS investigators and cops on such calls, about half or more of their investigations. For the very reason you point out below. As long as he has a reasonable belief that a crime is being committed a warrant is not required. And all that takes is someone telling him so in a convincing enough way...something most cops are trained to elicit from those they are interviewing. THAT has been the law for some years now, in case you were not aware of it. He is studiously avoiding, with the help of the spin doctors, any such knowledge, Ron. He has been told things like this for years here. On this and other subjects. He simply forgets it in a few minutes and babbles on as though he had not been told. AND wants to argue with you without having done one bit of research himself. The Greg's of the Web and Usenet are a dime a dozen. Industriously ignorant. You can find them all over the place, still insisting 9/11 was a US government conspiracy to incite war, opining that UFOs are circling the planet, and in insisting they have personal communication with the spirit of Elvis. Ron 0:- -- "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else) |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
The Meth Debate Continues
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006, Ron wrote:
"Greegor" wrote in message ups.com... Is this WHINEY? Kane wrote Would you mind posting your proof? Greg wrote That you're an intellectual prostitute, a shill? Kane wrote What was it you said? Notice you had to abort my words to have your stupid response? Just weaseling again, aren't you Greg? Basically you want the same kind of conversation that the nutsos run here to divert from any challenges to your stupidity I put to you. You don't have any proof. You just run off at the mouth, presuming you'll be taken seriously. No facts. No logic. Lies. Dodges. Keep it up Greg. All this is here for any future posters coming here for help to see before they accept any of your stupid dangerous advice. What stupid dangerous advice are you talking about? Do you mean telling people NOT to let the caseworker search their home, insisting on a WARRANT, etc? Insisting on constitutional right against unreasonable search and seizure is dangerous HOW? For WHO? A warrant is not something that a case manager is going to have gregg. Law Enforcement, yes, but not case managers. If you insist on a warrant when a law enforcement officer arrives at your door be prepared to get stepped on as he goes through the door. As long as he has a reasonable belief that a crime is being committed a warrant is not required. THAT has been the law for some years now, in case you were not aware of it. Ron Hi Ron, I hope you not suggesting that we should throw the Constitution out of the window. How do you define "reasonable"? Doan |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
The Meth Debate Continues
Doan wrote:
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006, Ron wrote: "Greegor" wrote in message ups.com... Is this WHINEY? Kane wrote Would you mind posting your proof? Greg wrote That you're an intellectual prostitute, a shill? Kane wrote What was it you said? Notice you had to abort my words to have your stupid response? Just weaseling again, aren't you Greg? Basically you want the same kind of conversation that the nutsos run here to divert from any challenges to your stupidity I put to you. You don't have any proof. You just run off at the mouth, presuming you'll be taken seriously. No facts. No logic. Lies. Dodges. Keep it up Greg. All this is here for any future posters coming here for help to see before they accept any of your stupid dangerous advice. What stupid dangerous advice are you talking about? Do you mean telling people NOT to let the caseworker search their home, insisting on a WARRANT, etc? Insisting on constitutional right against unreasonable search and seizure is dangerous HOW? For WHO? A warrant is not something that a case manager is going to have gregg. Law Enforcement, yes, but not case managers. If you insist on a warrant when a law enforcement officer arrives at your door be prepared to get stepped on as he goes through the door. As long as he has a reasonable belief that a crime is being committed a warrant is not required. THAT has been the law for some years now, in case you were not aware of it. Ron Hi Ron, I hope you not suggesting that we should throw the Constitution out of the window. How do you define "reasonable"? He doesn't. The state does. The departments teach it in police academy. And update as needed. "Exigent" is a word often used. If the officer has information that any reasonable person (sound familiar, stupid asshole....r r r r r ) would believe constituted a cause for concern for the safety of another...etc. etc. etc. Ron is telling you how it works. You wish to split hairs. YOU are the greatest danger to the Constitution, monkeyboy, because you don't understand it and along with other assholes that think they do, when it's convenient for THEM, you interpret it subjectively from circumstance to circumstance. A police officer's discretion on entry has been tested time and again. HE DOES NOT HAVE TO BE RIGHT in that he finds what was told to him or he though was occurring, he only needs to show that HE HAD EVERY REASON TO BELIEVE. Have cases gone the other way? Yes, with strong dissenting opinions from other justices. The Constitution was NOT created to help you and other ****ants like you either break the law or advocate for those that DO. Put your sick little head back up your ass and keep it there, monkeyboy. Hide your ugliness. Doan ... the blowhard know it all apologist for and protector of child abusers. Tell us again if you agreed with Fern, dancing evading sick little monkeyboy. 0:- -- "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
The Meth Debate Continues
Kane wrote
Stupid little ****s. That's all you are. The pack of you. Nope, no PATHOLOGY there! Coprolalia? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
The Meth Debate Continues
Greegor wrote:
Kane wrote Stupid little ****s. That's all you are. The pack of you. Nope, no PATHOLOGY there! Coprolalia? Is that the case when you refer to excrement as well? No, no pathology as far as I can tell, for you or I. You are a demonstrated stupid little ****, Greg. Live with it. We do just to be able to watch you make a fool of yourself so predictably. 0:- -- "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
The Meth Debate Continues
On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, 0:- wrote:
Doan wrote: On Sun, 2 Jul 2006, Ron wrote: "Greegor" wrote in message ups.com... Is this WHINEY? Kane wrote Would you mind posting your proof? Greg wrote That you're an intellectual prostitute, a shill? Kane wrote What was it you said? Notice you had to abort my words to have your stupid response? Just weaseling again, aren't you Greg? Basically you want the same kind of conversation that the nutsos run here to divert from any challenges to your stupidity I put to you. You don't have any proof. You just run off at the mouth, presuming you'll be taken seriously. No facts. No logic. Lies. Dodges. Keep it up Greg. All this is here for any future posters coming here for help to see before they accept any of your stupid dangerous advice. What stupid dangerous advice are you talking about? Do you mean telling people NOT to let the caseworker search their home, insisting on a WARRANT, etc? Insisting on constitutional right against unreasonable search and seizure is dangerous HOW? For WHO? A warrant is not something that a case manager is going to have gregg. Law Enforcement, yes, but not case managers. If you insist on a warrant when a law enforcement officer arrives at your door be prepared to get stepped on as he goes through the door. As long as he has a reasonable belief that a crime is being committed a warrant is not required. THAT has been the law for some years now, in case you were not aware of it. Ron Hi Ron, I hope you not suggesting that we should throw the Constitution out of the window. How do you define "reasonable"? He doesn't. The state does. The departments teach it in police academy. And update as needed. "Exigent" is a word often used. If the officer has information that any reasonable person (sound familiar, stupid asshole....r r r r r ) would believe constituted a cause for concern for the safety of another...etc. etc. etc. Hihihi! The "stupid asshole" is you since you were the one that has the problem with "reasonable person" standard. You were the one that claimed not to know where the "line" is. You were the one that said not knowing that line, you may have crossed it when you hit your kid. Rememered, "stupid asshole"??? Ron is telling you how it works. You wish to split hairs. YOU are the greatest danger to the Constitution, monkeyboy, because you don't understand it and along with other assholes that think they do, when it's convenient for THEM, you interpret it subjectively from circumstance to circumstance. Hihihi! Another "abreaction"??? A police officer's discretion on entry has been tested time and again. HE DOES NOT HAVE TO BE RIGHT in that he finds what was told to him or he though was occurring, he only needs to show that HE HAD EVERY REASON TO BELIEVE. Where is the "line"? ;-) Have cases gone the other way? Yes, with strong dissenting opinions from other justices. The Constitution was NOT created to help you and other ****ants like you either break the law or advocate for those that DO. Put your sick little head back up your ass and keep it there, monkeyboy. Funny, the only little head I see is yours when I go to bathroom and take a dump! ;-) Hide your ugliness. You can't hide yours! ;-) Doan ... the blowhard know it all apologist for and protector of child abusers. Tell us again if you agreed with Fern, dancing evading sick little monkeyboy. Tell us again how your mom approved of you calling other "smelly-****", "never-spanked" boy. Doan 0:- -- "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else) |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
abc's crisis of the foster care system (cross-posted) | [email protected] | General | 87 | June 24th 06 07:59 PM |
abc's crisis of the foster care system (cross-posted) | [email protected] | Spanking | 87 | June 24th 06 07:59 PM |
abc's crisis of the foster care system (cross-posted) | [email protected] | Foster Parents | 87 | June 24th 06 07:59 PM |
Meth: Hype Vs. Reality | Pohaku Kane | General | 1 | December 13th 05 11:06 PM |
Meth: Hype Vs. Reality | Pohaku Kane | Foster Parents | 0 | December 8th 05 10:29 PM |