Post: #151

(03-27-2017 08:26 PM)BrewDog Wrote:  

(03-27-2017 08:17 PM)Fisto Wrote:  Note, that the opening clause is pertaining to citizens and by definition an illegal alien does not reside with in the jurisdiction of a state.

And the next two phrases talk of PERSONS which shows Congressional intent that the two things are to be considered differently.

If you don't like what I have to say about this, go read what the Supreme Court says about it.

PLYLER v. DOE (1982)
YICK WO V. HOPKINS (1886)

My opinion is going to stay the exact same as it always has. Constitutional rights should not be given to people who are not legally in the country.

I don't care if SJWs from 1982 or 1886 or 2053 think they should.

Post: #152

Fisto,

I don't know whether you read Vox Day's blog, but both it and his book, Cuckservative, do an excellent job of breaking down the mentality and short-comings of so-called "Constitution Conservatives". Their commitment to believing in the power of the Constitution (a piece of paper) and the land (that the dirt, which is America, can and will cancel out all negative effects of being raised in an anti-democratic foreign country) makes them arrogantly wrong.

I never thought I'd meet one on the Roosh Forum, but here we are, and there he is.

Post: #153

It seems that some are misconstruing what I've stated here. I've never once advocated in favor of these illegal aliens. I've defended the US/Mexico border and I'm no fan of illegal aliens.

But to state the law and the Constitution and try to explain how it all will work out for this case doesn't make me some preacherman for the illegal alien movement.

Post: #154

(03-27-2017 08:40 PM)BrewDog Wrote:  It seems that some are misconstruing what I've stated here. I've never once advocated in favor of these illegal aliens. I've defended the US/Mexico border and I'm no fan of illegal aliens.

But to state the law and the Constitution and try to explain how it all will work out for this case doesn't make me some preacherman for the illegal alien movement.

That's not the point.

The point is that, the more and more you cite the Constitution, the less and less Fisto and I will change our minds about the guilt of the two defendants.

I just discovered the YouTube channel, Historia Civilis, which specializes in Roman History. One of his videos details the destruction of a Roman village at the hands of English barbarians: the most beautiful Roman women were stripped naked, crucified, and their breasts were cut off and sewed to their mouths.

Before your posts to Fisto, I merely wanted the defendants convicted and sentenced to life in prison. After your posts to Fisto, I want the two defendants crucified, their penises cut off, and sewed into each other's mouths.

Merenguero's posts don't have this effect on me. I know he's a lawyer, but are you?

Post: #155

(03-27-2017 09:00 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  Before your posts to Fisto, I merely wanted the defendants convicted and sentenced to life in prison. After your posts to Fisto, I want the two defendants crucified, their penises cut off, and sewed into each other's mouths.

There are places in the world with that sort of justice system. But I'm glad mine is not one of them.

And to answer your last question, for a long time in my life I was closer to this issue than you might imagine. I was on the good guy side of things. That's why I refer to them in the legal terms of "illegal alien" and not how the media refers to them as "undocumented migrants." I've smashed more illegal alien heads than the rest of this forum combined, I promise you.

I merely cited the law, and suddenly I'm a Social Justice Warrior. I think that's odd.

Post: #156

Heh. One of the suspects' father has just been arrested for being in the United States illegally.

Out, out, out!!!

Post: #157

Looks like they'll get deported Juan by Juan.

Post: #158

(03-27-2017 09:07 PM)BrewDog Wrote:  

(03-27-2017 09:00 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  Before your posts to Fisto, I merely wanted the defendants convicted and sentenced to life in prison. After your posts to Fisto, I want the two defendants crucified, their penises cut off, and sewed into each other's mouths.

There are places in the world with that sort of justice system. But I'm glad mine is not one of them.

And to answer your last question, for a long time in my life I was closer to this issue than you might imagine. I was on the good guy side of things. That's why I refer to them in the legal terms of "illegal alien" and not how the media refers to them as "undocumented migrants." I've smashed more illegal alien heads than the rest of this forum combined, I promise you.

I merely cited the law, and suddenly I'm a Social Justice Warrior. I think that's odd.

No you didn't. You got a condescending attitude and started cherry picking comments so you could then make more smart ass remarks before finally saying it was us who were "misconstruing" what you said.

And all the while putting yourself on the side of two illegal rapists.

You argue like a little weasel.

Post: #159

(03-27-2017 11:39 PM)Fisto Wrote:  No you didn't. You got a condescending attitude and started cherry picking comments so you could then make more smart ass remarks before finally saying it was us who were "misconstruing" what you said.

And all the while putting yourself on the side of two illegal rapists.

You argue like a little weasel.

Here's photos of me when I was 22 years old. Do you recognize that uniform? Do you think I'm on the side of illegal aliens? In that second photo, I am literally standing astride the US/Mexico border atop of a load truck that got stuck trying to drive over into the USA. Am I an SJW?

Post: #160

You look like a little weasel too.

Post: #161

Stop the pointless discussion and please buy someone a knife, bag of salt, pills of viagra for the father of that girl. Yea and a bottle of liquor so his little faggot-moral angel goes away and he can fully enjoy the glory of revenge.

Laws are for cucked civilised men.

EDIT : If you US citizens can convince Trump to pardon me after, I would gladly buy a ticket to Maryland and do it in the name of her father, I would live stream that shit if you guys interested.

Post: #162

(03-28-2017 12:17 AM)Uruz Wrote:  Stop the pointless discussion and please buy someone a knife, bag of salt, pills of viagra for the father of that girl. Yea and a bottle of liquor so his little faggot-moral angel goes away and he can fully enjoy the glory of revenge.

Laws are for cucked civilised men.

I normally enjoy your comments, but I have to take exception here.

Should no one have a trial? Have you ever been accused of something you didn't do? I fucking have and that shit was horrible for a few hours until the girl admitted she was just angry and told her dad a bunch of lies.

Her father was an honorable man and called the police back to tell them that his daughter had "exaggerated a bit" and the chief of police gave me his blessing and I went on my way. But had she stuck with her BS story, I would have been completely fucked in college and for the rest of my life. I have never hit a girl in my life, but she claimed I "roughed her up." And I fucking didn't.

Anyone can claim anything. That's why we have courts and trials so that no one can just accuse you of some horrible shit and then you get your head chopped off.

Post: #163

(03-27-2017 09:07 PM)BrewDog Wrote:  I merely cited the law, and suddenly I'm a Social Justice Warrior. I think that's odd.

You didn't merely cite the law. You made a strong prediction of acquittal, based on certain laws you cited. But when you cited those laws, you drove both me and Fisto into wanting stronger punishments.

I asked if you are a lawyer. And now I'm asking out again, because you didn't answer me the first time.

If you're not a lawyer, that would explain why you stir murderous feelings in at least two people when you argue the law.

Post: #164

No, I haven't but if I was born in the States I probably would, justly or unjustly.

Of course, anyone can claim anything and you might get fucked as result, its bad and shit might happen.

I am probably not the one with whom you should discuss law, courts and so on. I don't think I am a man that is 100% suited for a life in 21st century civilisation. If heard that something like this happened to anyone in my family I probably would not really care and do the right stuff myself. But as well, you usually don't leave rape scene without any visible and obvious marks, especially if it was two guys.

And yea, especially if I heard that it was done by immigrants I would not care at all for their rights. You are alien on my soil, the soil is not defined by law or by whatever regime is currently in power, but by my blood.

Post: #165

It's definitely right that the constitution doesn't count for illegals. An absurd proposition in the first place. Illegals are invaders and fall under military jurisdiction not legal.

Post: #166

(03-28-2017 12:41 AM)MMX2010 Wrote:  I asked if you are a lawyer. And now I'm asking out again, because you didn't answer me the first time.

Look a few posts upwards. Does that look like the face of a lawyer or a lawman?

What is your expertise with the law? Feelings?

Post: #167

(03-28-2017 12:42 AM)nomadbrah Wrote:  It's definitely right that the constitution doesn't count for illegals. An absurd proposition in the first place. Illegals are invaders and fall under military jurisdiction not legal.

A few rows up I posted the case law; the United States Supreme Court disagrees.

Post: #168

(03-28-2017 12:41 AM)MMX2010 Wrote:  But when you cited those laws, you drove both me and Fisto into wanting stronger punishments.

Why would that matter to anyone? You act like Brewdog is trying to persuade you.

From my understanding, Brewdog is correct about legal protections afforded anyone who is on our land. I don't get what issues you are having with them being procecuted, throwing them into a jail where they will get raped and getting them out of the country. Screw the deportation bullshit. Too many deportees come back just to screw up another citizen's life. They need to be held accountable and throw in jail before they are deported. They won't like prison once the other inmates find out what they did. Deportation on its own isn't enough of a deterrent.

Post: #169

I don't think BrewDog is being an SJW at all. He's merely stating what the Supreme Court has ruled on this subject.

I agree that the Supreme Court ruled incorrectly, however. I think the Supreme Court is very flawed and has made rulings that make no sense. Gay marriage being one of the most egregious, for example.

Quote:nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

The 14th Amendment only applies to STATE governments, not federal. The federal Bill of Rights only applies to citizens. So although State governments must give due process, Federal Authorities do not.

Therefore in crimes involving illegal immigrants of a serious, felony level nature, ICE should step in and deal with the extradition/execution process.

With horribly violent crimes, it makes no sense to send such a person back to a country where they can harm more people. As long as there is solid proof the person did terrible violence, they should just get a summary execution by military judge.

Post: #170

(03-28-2017 01:16 AM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

(03-28-2017 12:41 AM)MMX2010 Wrote:  But when you cited those laws, you drove both me and Fisto into wanting stronger punishments.

Why would that matter to anyone? You act like Brewdog is trying to persuade you.

Brewdog made a specific prediction (acquittal) based on him citing certain laws. But citing those laws produces the opposite emotion effect needed for acquittal, which makes his prediction nonsensical.

Post: #171

(03-28-2017 12:00 AM)Fisto Wrote:  You look like a little weasel too.

Have you ever been in a valley by yourself in the middle of the night with no other agents within miles to help you and suddenly you encounter 70 people? You can't even call anyone on the radio because you're too far away to hit the repeater, so you have to deal with that huge group of people by yourself?

I have.

And that's why I thought your PM threat was a little bit cute. Send some more PM's please. I enjoy laughing. If I can handle 70 people alone, then 69 less doesn't worry me.

Post: #172

(03-28-2017 01:32 AM)MMX2010 Wrote:  Brewdog made a specific prediction (acquittal) based on him citing certain laws. But citing those laws produces the opposite emotion effect needed for acquittal, which makes his prediction nonsensical.

I must have missed his post about acquittal. All I saw was his comments about due process which, as far as I am aware, is accurate. Same for tourists as well.

You continue talking about him making you want harsher penalties as if that means anything to anyone.

What we need is jailable offences for people who allow these sanctuary cities. We need stricter responses to people who allow this behavior to cultivate. From my understanding, the only response is to withhold government funding if they break the law. The people running these sanctuary cities should be procecuted.

Post: #173

(03-27-2017 08:31 PM)Fisto Wrote:  Constitutional rights should not be given to people who are not legally in the country.

I don't care if SJWs from 1982 or 1886 or 2053 think they should.

Post: #174

http://www.kwbg.com/2017/03/24/barnhardt...in-prison/

Post: #175

(03-28-2017 09:04 AM)rudebwoy Wrote:  http://www.kwbg.com/2017/03/24/barnhardt...in-prison/

Yes, there are white rapists, just like there are white illegal immigrants, and even... (shocking) white Latinos!

Rapists should go to jail, illegal immigrants should be deported, and illegal immigrants should have less rights than citizens and legal immigrants, regardless of what race they are.

What is so hard to understand about that for some people?