User Profile: 2GodBeTheGlory


Member Since: September 02, 2010


123 To page: Go
  • [11] August 24, 2016 at 3:47pm

    I don’t call 911 for many reasons – now you give another reason why not.

  • [52] August 24, 2016 at 3:44pm

    Why don’t the legislature take away LE “right” to cordon off a major disaster area, since they are not RESPONSIBLE nor ACCOUNTABLE for THEIR actions? LE have no duty to protect, and therefore should not have ANY right to prevent citizens from entering an area to render aid.

    Sounds like a “patch” to government screw-up. Reduce government, problem goes away.

    Responses (2) +
  • [8] August 23, 2016 at 12:06pm

    Who are these “experts”? Are they from the southern poverty law center? Maybe a state run university “department for the independent studies of racial viewpoints of minority victims in a white culture”?

    Responses (2) +
  • [4] August 22, 2016 at 6:52pm

    Did he restore their 2nd amendment right?

    Responses (1) +
  • [-1] August 21, 2016 at 8:03pm


    RE: “law keeping you safe” – Again, what RIGHT do you or the state have to inflict tyranny upon the population. Who do you think you are to think that you know better than anyone? By what measure did you and the state utilize and by what accountability do you have to the people and the supreme law of the land.

    Again, idiot, you are an idiot because you hate the founders. You hate what they stood for, and you hate what their intent was. You are no conservative but a liberal asserting you are one thing but like Jesus said, a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Why? Glad you asked, idiot. Because the founders HATED behavior laws and called them “inherently evil”. Why? Because they knew, like I do, that it leads to tyranny. They understood that the only JUST laws are ones that hold a person accountable for the harm they inflict upon others. It is up to the jury to determine IF the harm was justified or not – not you and not the state, idiot. That’s not “Anarchy”, but justice. Although I can understand why an idiot like you refuse to understand the difference because you hate justice and desire tyranny.

  • August 21, 2016 at 12:28pm

    Yep, your right. If you run form LE then that authorizes LE to use escalate to lethal force. I found that law somewhere…….oh….wait…………..

    So at least we know that your ok with the state killing people who have no weapons. Keep pushing.

  • [2] August 21, 2016 at 12:26pm

    Like using deadly force on an unarmed person? Yea, let’s not talk about THAT, right?

  • [1] August 21, 2016 at 12:25pm

    Yes, because not doing so at the time I tell you means that I, as an officer, can shot you dead. Got it.

  • [1] August 21, 2016 at 12:24pm

    Doesn’t seem to stop the pro LE from asserting that a person without a weapon authorizes the use of lethal force.

    Maybe the public will start using the same measure that LE utilizes and use it AGAINST LE with respect to the escalation of lethal force. Would you be ok with that?

  • August 21, 2016 at 12:19pm


    Yep, your “logic” is that if you disobey the state, you should be killed immediately.

  • August 21, 2016 at 12:18pm


    That’s why I carry wherever I go, so no matter who is being a criminal, I can attempt to protect myself from those that would do me harm.

  • [-1] August 21, 2016 at 12:02pm


    Re: “cops are not above the law” – REALLY??????!!!!!! Lets us see how you explain why 4 LA officers have had no charges filed for firing over 100 rounds at a pick-up truck with two women (mother and daughter) delivering news papers. All officers admitted that the vehicle didn’t do anything aggressive and that they did not identify their “targets”.

    Don’t attempt to lie here and assert that LE are not above the law. They have killed, murdered, stole, lied on the stand, and planted evidence with NO ACCOUNTABILITY!

  • [-1] August 21, 2016 at 11:57am


    The reason why “To protect and serve” is in quotes is because it has no basis in legality. There is not ONE law that requires LE nor the state to protect anyone. Don’t believe me? Good, then maybe, just maybe you should educate yourself beyond the public system and actually read the SCOTUS rulings in Warren v. District of Columbia and Castle Rock v. Gonzales, instead of reading the interoffice memorandum from the departments lawyer.

    RE: “BUT making a law for public safety is for that purpose of keeping some alive that otherwise would likely die.” – Tell us, oh great idiot, where is THAT in the constitution? I DARE you to find any federal or state constitution that assumes that role.

    Re: “I guess you would rather have free access to running over kids jaywalking and blaming them, right?” – Nope, I want he constitution to be followed and a jury of peers to make the determination of an act that harms another. I notice that you could care less about the constitution, criminal tyrant.

    Re: “Yeah, you’re stupid” – The goto response of the ignorant and tyrants. When you cannot base your response in the constitution, lets break out the ad hominem “your stupid, that’s why!” playground bully tactics.

    Re: “I’m a thinking conservative” – No, you’re not. A conservative wants what the founders created; small government held accountable to the people with limited laws. You clearly want tyranny where behavior laws are put in place to “protect us”.

  • [-1] August 20, 2016 at 5:04pm


    So, where is it codified that the state is responsible and accountable for any persons life? If the state is NOT responsible nor ACCOUNTABLE, then they do NOT have the RIGHT to make laws to “protect us”.

    I noticed that you cared less of the number of people KILLED by medical mistakes that FAR out paces your puny numbers. Yet I don’t hear you complain about those deaths but the small numbers that are not within the states rights to create such laws. Maybe you are unaware that the founders position that behavior laws where “inherently evil”.

    Maybe you want to put your numbers against the CDC’s for other categories;

    - 29,001 Alcohol-induced deaths
    - 30,208 falls
    - 38,851 poisoning

    So, in all your chest thumping for a .001732773% of all yearly deaths. Wow. Maybe you can get the state to regulate height, weight, ladders, chemicals, and all our lives. Have the state tell us where to live, what jobs we will have and everything that will taught. I’m sure your liberal buddies will love your stance, however, free people will tell you to LEAVE US ALONE traitor of the founders and the U.S. Constitution!

  • [-1] August 20, 2016 at 10:12am


    The problem is too entrenched. They will refuse to let it go for if the people take back control, then the current bunch of criminals will be tossed out.

    The problems that I see:

    - Too many laws. The government admits more laws / regulations than can be tracked
    - State Bar is controlled by / for the state. This means that the judge, prosecutor, LE, and your own defense attorney are all co-workers.
    - SCOTUS not be held accountable and cannot be held accountable for infringing upon the constitution
    - Federal income tax. This allows the federal government to take money directly from citizens, then “grant” the states, with strings, in order to execute control where the constitution does not allow by forcing the states to enact laws that the citizens do not want (extortion)
    - Too many handouts that keeps the people in slavery

    Noway they will give up that power without a fight.

  • [-2] August 19, 2016 at 8:40pm


    Let me guess, public school educated?

    My Flesh-Kincaid writing score is usually above collage level, so I am sorry if you are having problems with reading comprehension. Might I recommend a course in reading comprehension is in order for you. In my previous post, the score was 3.9 grade level (6.1 “average” grade level based on 7 different measurements/methods), as I attempted to really bring it down for you since your original post was at grade level 3 (6.1 “average” grade level, again, based upon 7 different measurements/methods).

    It’s a country that is touted as “free” so do as you see fit. Your life, your choice.

  • [1] August 19, 2016 at 6:44pm

    Don’t forget the elderly gentlemen (84) in NY that was tackled by one of those officers for jaywalking – who didn’t speak English.

  • [-3] August 19, 2016 at 6:23pm


    Well, let me try to explain it in small words so that you might understand.

    1 – It is known that every person will infringe upon 3 federal laws / regulations every single day (estimated)

    2 – You have asserted that people should “respect ..the law”

    3 – You have asserted that people should not “break the law with no recourse”

    4 – You have asserted that we should EQUALLY enforce all laws

    5 – You have asserted that LE has “morality and virtue”

    So, lets go by the numbers, shall we?

    1 – As the judges and LE will tell you that “ignorance of the law is no excuse, shouldn’t your “morality” compel you to turn yourself into the nearest prosecutor for the immoral crimes you’ve committed against the law?

    2 – Since you “respect the law” then show it by turning yourself in. It is the moral and lawful thing to do, right?

    3 – See 1 and 2

    4 – See 1 and 2

    5 – Expecting the state and it’s employees to be “moral’ is an abomination of what our founders believed.

    Do I need to use smaller words for you to understand?

  • [-2] August 19, 2016 at 6:12pm


    Then your ok with an invalid charge, since, the correct charge should be “assault”. Well, oops, wait a minute, the officer was using the exact same verbiage of what you are claiming the citizen with. So, do you believe that the law should be equal and therefore both individuals should be charged with assault, both officer and camera holder? You know, the “fighting words” assertion?

  • [-1] August 19, 2016 at 6:04pm


    RE: “serious issue” – REALLY?!!!! There are over 400,000 deaths every single year due to medical mistakes are your going to focus on less than one half of a single percent of yearly deaths and call it “serious issue”????!!!!!!!!

123 To page: Go