User Profile: sasquatch08

sasquatch08

Member Since: November 09, 2010

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • January 26, 2015 at 2:21am

    @Des_3:

    The ads are just an annoyance. The lack of intelligence from people who post here is much more annoying,

    The fact that most posters are complete morons and big government stooges is intolerable.

    It’s now past midnight. Good night and good luck.

  • [1] January 26, 2015 at 2:15am

    Last post:

    Every single one of you attacking me or giving me a down thumb doen’t understand JACK about the Constitution!

    Ironic huh? How all you RET@RDS down thumb me while supporting the same jackbooted thuggery you claim to hate.

    You really are the “useful idiots” described in the past century and you don’t even know it.

    I know you expect me to go off, but I won’t do that. You’re just sad. Examine yourselves, hopefully you improve.

    Until then I have no use for you, nor does any other thinking person.

    When ish really hits the fan, don’t come to my house. I might not believe in that BS you push about “trigger control”, but near me, you die at 800 meters out.

  • [7] January 26, 2015 at 1:03am

    @LakeHartwell:

    Sorry to hear that you can’t view the video. I hope your technical issues are resolved post haste!

    However, the problems I’ve mentioned above are too much for me.

    I can no longer deal with a website so full of idiots who prefer the downthumb to a discussion. Nor those can’t handle how this country was actually founded, basic logic or anything that requires actual mental activity.

    This site has gone too far into mindless partisan bashing of Obama and his acolytes and too far away from intelligent discussion for me to continue to partake.

    Also, I would like to say that it has been a pleasure to share a site with people such as yourself, East, The Monk, Foo, AllPeopleFreePeople etc. Keep up the good fight.

    I fervently hope that you can do so. Otherwise real Conservatism will fall to conservatism in name only. Do NOT succumb to the idiocy that got me the downthumbs and comments here: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/24/h-s-teacher-confiscates-students-cellphone-during-class-then-something-sickening-happens/

    While it may not appear on the surface to be so, this is liberal group thinking, Obama thinking. It’s exceedingly dangerous to both you and our Republic. Shun those that practice it, regardless of what they call themselves, but always hope that they might see the light. Stick to logic morals and ethics.

    Again, I am done. It has been one of the rare pleasures of my life to have consorted with some of you. “Good night and good luck.”

  • [50] January 26, 2015 at 12:23am

    I’m going to give the officer the benefit of the doubt here since a loaded and cocked gun was found near the deceased AND I CAN’T WATCH THE VIDEO WITH OUT SOME DAMN NISSAN AD RUNNING EVERY FIVE SECONDS ELSEWHERE ON THE PAGE!

    I’m done. I’m done with the ads, the stupid reporting, the lack of writers who passed Middle School English and the number of “conservative” idiots here who wouldn’t know “conservatism” if it bit them on the rear (bunch of freaking liberals masquerading as something else and being douches about it).

    I’m gone.

    And if I ever meet Glenn, I’ll give him a piece of my mind. Not that he would listen, you know, being the stalwart man of the people he is and taking an average of 15 calls a week.

    Responses (9) +
  • [-1] January 25, 2015 at 9:30pm

    You guys can keep downthumbing me all you want. It doesn’t make you right, just stubborn.

    This is basic political philosophy, basic legal philosophy and conservative thought 101.

    You can’t give to others an authority you don’t possess, just like I can’t give you the Ferrari in my garage. Both are for the same reason; neither the authority or the Ferrari exist.

    Here’s a fantastic explanation of exactly what I’m saying that got dozens of upthumbs when another commenter posted it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOUS6OalV2I

    Regardless of how you feel about the use of a phone during class, unless it was being used for harmful criminal activity the teacher had no right to take it. Such a seizure is theft. If it required a physical confrontation it’s strong arm robbery. That it’s a distraction may be true but it’s a flimsy argument. Many things are distracting in life, you don’t have the right to take them all away from others because you’re being distracted. Learn some discipline. How would you like it if libs came and “confiscated” your guns because the noise of a gun range was “distracting”? That they planned to return them later wouldn’t matter.

    I stand on a principle far older than any of us and I will continue to do so. The rest of you can do what you want, but right now you’re acting like the very liberals you claim you despise and I don’t think you even realize it. Whether you realize it or not, you’re championing theft in the name of a group.

  • [-1] January 25, 2015 at 8:38pm

    @Irishdave:

    Thanks for taking time out of your busy day to attempt to take the wind out of my sails. You must be an amazingly happy person to be so vindictive. Also, this isn’t a 1A issue, it’s a ownership of property issue IMHO.
    < .>
    No one here has yet answered my question: Where does the teacher get the authority to seize private property that’s not a threat to himself or others?

    The answer is nowhere, he doesn’t have it.

    No one can give transfer power to someone else that they themselves don’t possess. No group can do such a thing either, if said power is not something that the individuals of the group possess.

    No one on Earth has the right to take property from someone else because it’s a distraction. If you’re doing something that requires concentration and your neighbor is tuning up his Harley and making a racket, do you have the right to confiscate his bike or the keys to it? No, that’s called theft. Your neighbor will call the police and you’ll be arrested, rightfully so I might add.

    Since I don’t have the authority to confiscate items from others that distract me, and no one else in this country does either, we do not have the ability to bestow such authority on anyone else. It doesn’t matter if it seems like a “good idea” or if it just feels right, we can’t give away what we don’t have.

    Saying he has the authority to confiscate private property, because it was given to him, is one of the baseis of Liberal group thought.

    Food for thought.

  • [12] January 25, 2015 at 7:40pm

    @Monk:

    It’s always struck me as odd about city people that they always wait til the last second to prepare for a problem rather than doing it in increments over time during the good weather months.

    Where I grew up 30″ of snow was more than a normal two days, but it wasn’t unheard of. Schools might be be closed if it came with a lot of wind, but not much else would shut down. People just kind of shrugged said “I’m glad I own a snowblower or plow.” and went about their lives.

  • [4] January 25, 2015 at 7:31pm

    I don’t know if they’re “Big government” per se. The Dropkick Murphy’s have always been a huge fan of unions and they have a lot of songs about unions.

    They’re from Boston, so the Longshoreman’s union is huge for them. The Boston blue collar guys they sing about are all about their union, booze, broads and fighting. That’s exactly what the Murphy’s sing about.

    Just off the top of my head… Boys on the Docks, 10 Years of Service and Take ‘em Down are all very pro union songs and many of their other songs reference unions or work that is typically union dominated.

    They also have a lot of songs that reference being a super hardworking person and getting stepped on by the elites.
    Punk has always been political, these guys just aren’t the anti-government type, they’re the anti-guys who are successful and that sells in certain demographics.

    Dropkick is like RATM only punk instead of hard rock. Feeding a certain group of people what they want to hear in exchange for boatloads of money. That’s why it’s hard to take RATM seriously, they’re exactly the same people they complain about.

    Also, Dropkick just made themselves look foolish because they exposed that they don’t know the difference between public and private unions.

  • [15] January 25, 2015 at 7:18pm

    I think they do believe it.

    As you said Mr. Galt; they live in a bubble. Part of that bubble is having a cushy government job that pays too well, comes with great benefits and from which you can’t be fired even for gross incompetence, negligence or criminal activity.

  • [2] January 25, 2015 at 3:13pm

    Moore doesn’t smoke crack, he’d be a lot thinner if he did.

    Moore is just your garden variety idiot with a bit of bats%÷^ crazy on the side.

  • [5] January 25, 2015 at 3:10pm

    The reason Obama (and all the other Lefty bigwigs) refer to the country as a Democracy is because of the average knowledge level of thier base is quite low.

    “This is what a Republic looks like!” Isn’t a good picket chant because then you’ll have protestors asking what a Republic is and you’ll be forced to explain that Democracy is actually just mob rule and since we’re not a Democracy, and we have laws that need to be followed, the protestors can’t actually get what they want in most cases.

    That whole “This is what Democracy looks like!” Chant is just the Modern American English way of saying “We want bread and circuses!”

  • January 25, 2015 at 2:18pm

    My suggestion here is pretty simple, have an adult policy about phones.

    Phones were pretty new when I was in high school but our policy was as follows:

    1) You couldn’t take the phone out of your pocket unless you had a call from your parents or someone else you had valid reason to believe was calling you due to an emergency.

    2) Having your phone out in class got you told to put it away, if they had to tell you again you got detention.

    3) Using a phone to cheat, or attempt to cheat was a one week suspension and permanent mark on your record.

    At no time did teachers attempt to take a phone away from someone, they just forwarded the paperwork to get you punished.

    This policy had a lot of advantages. Phones were still available for emergency use and teachers didn’t have to overstep their authority by taking student’s personal property, even for a short period of time. On top of that, in our school detention SUCKED, so kids had a big incentive to act like an adult with an adult device.

    The logic of banning cell phones in classrooms makes no sense to me.

    A cellphone is an adult tool, kids must be taught to treat it as such. We don’t teach children gun safety by not letting them have a gun. We teach it by setting the rules, allowing access to a gun and enforcing the rules. The same should be done with a cellphone.

    Policies that allow confiscation don’t teach impulse control, they just remove the device. Nothing is learned.

  • [-3] January 25, 2015 at 1:56pm

    Apparently what I said was totally misunderstood.

    First, as I said; under what authority does the teacher have the ability to confiscate the phone? A school policy?

    A school “rule” or “policy” isn’t a law, and it’s subject to change at any time the administrators choose without warning. Once it’s confiscated what can they do with it? Can they look use it or through it? Can they find the personal texts and emails about how a kid has mental problems because he’s bullied and his Dad has cancer? And what guarantee do you have that they won’t illegally go through the phone anyway? If the cops can’t just take your phone, why can a unionized teacher do it?

    Second, when I say “attacker” I’m not referring to a school shooter. I was referring to bullies and fights. If you think a 16 year old kid isn’t going to pause for a second when you throw something the size of smart phone at his face… well he is.

    Third, there’s a safety aspect. If the teacher has a heart attack or there’s another medical emergency cell phones are the fastest way to bring in competent help. If they’re all tucked away in the lockers there’s not much point having them in the first place. In the event of a shooting, you’re not calling the cops to tell them you’re trapped in a maintenance closet with the phone you left in your locker.

    Finally, As I said in my OP, “there’s more to this story and IF THERE ISN’T…” in no way did I say that if the kid was using it to cheat that the teacher was in the wrong

  • [-14] January 25, 2015 at 3:36am

    On a side note: I’d also be much more highly protective of my phone in a public school setting. The people “protecting” me are proven to be incompetent so the phone might be my only chance to get actual help.

    Also, while it may be against school policy, I can throw it at an attacker and maybe hit him/her in the face which is more than some 60+ year old teacher can probably do (Unless it’s a chemistry teacher who can toss some strong acids or bases at the perp.)

  • [-36] January 25, 2015 at 3:16am

    I’m going to go the other way with this.

    Why did the teacher confiscate the phone and under what authority did he do so? It doesn’t matter that he took it from another student unless he has good evidence it was being used in cheating. If I hand my friend my wallet and ask him to go get me something from the gas station I’m still going to kick/stab/shoot your rear if you try to relieve him of my wallet.

    There’s a lot more to this story than we know, and if there isn’t the teacher deserved a thrashing for theft.

    I don’t care who you are, how old you are or what your position is.

    I catch you taking my phone without legal authority, you better have a good damn reason or you’re going to get arrested at the very least and you won’t be unscathed when the cops show up.

    Responses (24) +
  • [1] January 24, 2015 at 10:27pm

    Big fan of Heineken here too. Drinking one right now actually…

  • [2] January 24, 2015 at 10:24pm

    The master stroke will be when they bad California Judges from court rooms!

  • [1] January 24, 2015 at 10:03pm

    Those beers were perfectly innocent and drinkable! Not particularly tasty but still drinkable!

  • [13] January 24, 2015 at 10:01pm

    He’s an idiot looking for attention and he’s not very bright.

    WWJD if he was a sniper? “Jesus wouldn’t put any soldiers lives in harm’s way in the first place because he wouldn’t have sent them 2 Iraq”.

    If Jesus was a sniper where would get the authority to choose when the country goes to war or where? Oh, that’s right, he wouldn’t have such authority because civilian leadership gets to make that choice, not enlisted soldiers, sailors, airmen or Marines!

    johnVMFA122: It’s not worth it. You’d expend energy and get your boots dirty over a guy who’s such a has-been that he resorts to offensive and slanderous comments towards a major film success just so people remember his name.

  • [5] January 24, 2015 at 9:53pm

    Sure would be nice if your average citizen could purchase their fine (fully automatic) products.

123 To page: Go