@grok is it common for “Christian” Zach to deflect and attack peoples character in replies? This is a judgement based attack to discredit someone, which does not feel very Matthew 7:3–5
He often name calls people, have you seen that in his other replies to people? Deflects to dismantling their character through his personal judgment.
@Flyhalf_Zach@Nothighregister@theMakarioz Holy this guy creates entire false realities in his head from absolutely no info. Holy deflection. First half of that reply was just discrediting my character. Maybe that’s why people hide that so it forces you to read my words not what you can assume about me.
@Flyhalf_Zach@Nothighregister@theMakarioz “Oh if the media does it it’s fine they can take cameras to the Christmas parade and capture children in their footage. However, I don’t trust my common man only my kings and their media, instead I demonize my common man and assume the worst!!!”
Zach, it’s more pedophilic of you to assume that anyone who takes photos or videos near children is potentially doing it for heinous reasons. I’d dig into why that’s your first assumption. There’s cameras everywhere now, look into Axon or the more popular Flock.
Weirds me tf out when people automatically assume if someone does something around kids it’s because they’re a pedophile.
Zach’s brain is so big he knows for certain the auditor was unnecessary from a short clip which starts half way into the interaction. Watch the full scene, the wife was confrontational and blocking the auditors path, he then says “move out of my path or I’ll move you” and the husband steps up in the auditors face in which the auditor tries to move. It was already simple battery on the husband and wife when they blocked his path aggressively. The camera bump to the face happened after they became the aggressors.
Auditor tried to walk away, something the husband and wife should’ve done first.
Police wrongfully tase and chase protester, end up costing the citizens $175,000 in a settlement. While I do not agree with the message of these protesters, I do agree their rights were being violated.
Two protesters Joshua Condiotti-Wade and Eric Brandt were demonstrating outside the Adams County Human Services building in Commerce City, Colorado. Wearing bright lime-green shirts and holding large flags with profanity-laden anti-police slogans, their messages I'm sure were deliberately provocative.
While many—including myself—do not agree with the vulgar tone or the message behind their protest, the events that unfolded that day serve as a stark reminder of why constitutional protections must apply equally to everyone, regardless of how offensive their speech may be to others.
When Commerce City Police Officers Chris Dickey and Ryan Sedgwick responded to a call from inside the facility, things escalated rapidly. Officer Dickey repeatedly insisted that the public government building was "private property" and demanded that the protesters lower their flagpoles and leave.
When Condiotti-Wade refused to provide identification without being informed of a crime he was suspected of committing, Officer Dickey declared him under arrest for trespassing and disorderly conduct.
What followed was an unlawful pursuit across the parking lot. During the chase, Officer Dickey drew his Taser and fired at Condiotti-Wade while he was running away with his flag.
The situation was only defused when police supervisor Commander Mark Morgan arrived on the scene and immediately intervened. Captured on body camera.
Commander Morgan reprimanded Officer Dickey, reminding him of basic constitutional law: exercise of free speech on public government property is not trespassing or disorderly conduct, and officers cannot demand identification or make an arrest without reasonable suspicion of a crime.
Condiotti-Wade subsequently filed a federal civil rights lawsuit alleging excessive force and violations of his First and Fourth Amendment rights. Commerce City settled the case out of court for $175,000.
You do not have to endorse or support a group's message to recognize when government overreach and excessive force take place. The First Amendment exists precisely to protect controversial and unpopular speech.
When law enforcement officers disregard constitutional boundaries to suppress speech they dislike, everyone's civil liberties are put at risk.
Supporting the Constitution means defending the rights of even those with whom we strongly disagree.
@BigSky2A@ButtonPusher_@grok@ChaosTV “Tough guy” as an insult while you argue for being under tyrannical ruling. Mocking someone as a tough guy while acting like a coward when your rights get trampled on.
Very interesting stance you’re taking, has to be ragebait.
@BigSky2A@grok@ButtonPusher_@ChaosTV What’s the motive on wanting American citizens to be under gestapo ruling where cops can arrest law abiding citizens and you’re supporting it? I hope this is ragebait.