Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Ashotep

Is a gang member a terrorist?

78 posts in this topic

I stated earlier in the topic that I grew up in the middle of the L.A. metro area, them very things I stated happen on a daily basis around there, gang members have earned themselves the label of terrorists. I looked at your topic, I believe in freedom, just not criminal freedom. They don't have the right to go around committing murder, or rape, or assault, or invading homes, or gang mobbing someone, or stealing.

The same laws that applies to the rest of us apply to them also. If they want to act like psychopaths and terrorists, then that is how they will be thought of.

But do they have the right to legal representation? Do they have the right to a fair trial? Can they be deemed inocent until proven guilty by a jury? What you don't seem to understand is that if someone is classified as a terrorist they have none of those rights. That's why terrorist is not a word to be applied to just any old criminal. If you don't get that then move to Cambodia or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

every1 could turn into a terrorist ! bush turned alot of people into terrorist o_O

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But do they have the right to legal representation? Do they have the right to a fair trial? Can they be deemed inocent until proven guilty by a jury? What you don't seem to understand is that if someone is classified as a terrorist they have none of those rights. That's why terrorist is not a word to be applied to just any old criminal. If you don't get that then move to Cambodia or something.

Where do you get they don't have rights?? Even the masterminds of 9/11 went to trial? How about this, if they don't want to be called a terrorist, then those guilty need to stop being one. Quit trying to make the psychopath look like a victim, the only thing they are a victim of is their own insanity.

Or do you have a guilty conscience?

Edited by HavocWing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where do you get they don't have rights??

Terrorists are treated as enemy combatants instead of citizens. A couple of pieces of legislation say that the military can hold terrorists with no charges or representation and torture them. That this applies to US citizens. Hell, they've already executed a couple of "terrorists" who happened to be US citizens with drone strikes. Since there's no real definition of either terrorist or gang, the term (and this end run around our rights under the law) would apply to pretty much any group they wanted.

Even the masterminds of 9/11 went to trial? How about this, if they don't want to be called a terrorist, then those guilty need to stop being one.

I believe the masterminds of 9/11 went back to Saudi Arabia. You're arguing semantics (i.e. "They terrify me. They're terrorists."). What Oversword is saying is that allowing them to label gangs as terrorists opens the door to using that label for any group the government disapproves of and circumventing their rights.

Quit trying to make the psychopath look like a victim, the only thing they are a victim of is their own insanity.

No one's trying to make a psychopath look like a victim. Some are arguing that giving the government any more power to use a broad brush to strip groups of Americans of their Constitutional rights is a bad thing.

Or do you have a guilty conscience?

Awesome insinuation. You really got him. If he keeps trying to make his point, say something about his penis or his momma.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome insinuation. You really got him. If he keeps trying to make his point, say something about his penis or his momma.

He said he had friends who are one percenters, that insunates it. No I am not going to say anything about his penis or his momma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a one percenter is so bold as to wear a patch saying to everyone that they are a lawbreaker and don't follow laws, then why should they even be granted any rights under the law?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a one percenter is so bold as to wear a patch saying to everyone that they are a lawbreaker and don't follow laws, then why should they even be granted any rights under the law?

Because that's what once made America special - the fact that we follow law instead of just making it up and persecuting those we don't like (like those who wear certain patches or tattoos). It was a revolution of freedom that a government would deliberately limit itself to only exercising its power to punish in cases where the evidence proved the crime had been committed. Of course, the war on terror has eliminated a lot of freedoms and some people seem pretty anxious to toss even more out the window.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh no mother nature is scary I think she must be a terrorist!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because that's what once made America special - the fact that we follow law instead of just making it up and persecuting those we don't like (like those who wear certain patches or tattoos). It was a revolution of freedom that a government would deliberately limit itself to only exercising its power to punish in cases where the evidence proved the crime had been committed. Of course, the war on terror has eliminated a lot of freedoms and some people seem pretty anxious to toss even more out the window.

I'm not against freedom, I'm against murder, rape, stealing, assault, arson, terrorism, the main things gangs prevail themselves in, which are against the law. No I don't like criminals.

You talk about laws, they don't follow laws, that is what their patch is about.

Edited by HavocWing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a one percenter is so bold as to wear a patch saying to everyone that they are a lawbreaker and don't follow laws, then why should they even be granted any rights under the law?

post-86645-0-32195900-1350006237_thumb.j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not against freedom, I'm against murder, rape, stealing, assault, arson, terrorism, the main things gangs prevail themselves in, which are against the law. No I don't like criminals.

So, you think that having been proud of a country that required evidence to convict people means I'm PRO murder, rape, stealing, assault, arson and terrorism? As you point out, all those things are already against the law (except terrorism which has no definition beyond "If the government decides you've done it"). Why would you believe it's a bad thing that the government protects us from itself? Why would you believe it's a good thing that the government should be able to strip that protection from any US Citizen without a trial?

You talk about laws, they don't follow laws, that is what their patch is about.

Yes, that's what the patch is about. So what? I can head into the nearest police station and confess to killing Kennedy and they won't execute me for treason. Y'know why? Yep, it's that whole nation of law that requires evidence for convictions thing.

So, you don't like bikers. I'll tell you something: Neither do I (though in my case, it's mostly because they deliberately make their motorcycles louder - that really p***es me off). If you've proof of their crimes, you should come forward and have them prosecuted. If you don't have anything more than rumor, you should probably stop posting on internet forums that their Constitutional rights should be violated and they be declared treats to national security.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you should probably stop posting on internet forums that their Constitutional rights should be violated and they be declared treats to national security.

I didn't say they should be violated, what I posted was about morality, how can someone who has no respect for the law be protected under it? It's about their morality.

Edited by HavocWing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say they should be violated, what I posted was about morality, how can someone who has no respect for the law be protected under it? It's about their morality.

Because the law has no morality. That's what makes it such a powerful shield to freedom (theoretically). No one gets convicted because a government official doesn't like them (theoretically). Morality is subjective and different from person to person. It's much better to live in a world where you know what things are illegal than one where someone's personal interpretation of your character determines whether you've committed a crime.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a one percenter is so bold as to wear a patch saying to everyone that they are a lawbreaker and don't follow laws, then why should they even be granted any rights under the law?

Wow. Why don't you just head over to North Korea. You may like it there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say they should be violated, what I posted was about morality, how can someone who has no respect for the law be protected under it? It's about their morality.

So you think anothers moral standards should dictate over anothers and that laws of ones morality trumps another. Go back to the 1400s and tell me how that works out for ya.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last year Obama signed an order saying a suspected terrorist can be held in Gitmo idefinitely...without a trial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say they should be violated, what I posted was about morality, how can someone who has no respect for the law be protected under it? It's about their morality.

You just don't have any common sense. Maybe you should read up about the republic, it's history, it's laws, and see why you can't take someones rights away just because they have a patch on thier jacket. We have laws and due process for a very good reason. To save us from scared little idiots that can only see things in black and white. Your screen name has the word havoc in it therefore you may create havoc. Bad for society. We should probably just lock you up now to be on the safe side. Also you've been arguing against law and justice. Off with his head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You just don't have any common sense. Maybe you should read up about the republic, it's history, it's laws, and see why you can't take someones rights away just because they have a patch on thier jacket. We have laws and due process for a very good reason. To save us from scared little idiots that can only see things in black and white. Your screen name has the word havoc in it therefore you may create havoc. Bad for society. We should probably just lock you up now to be on the safe side. Also you've been arguing against law and justice. Off with his head.

Well I would rather die than live in a country that exalts evil and terrorism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just admit you're wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just admit you're wrong.

Wrong from what??? If they want to follow laws and live normal laws like the rest of us, I'm not against that, the thing is they don't want to, they want to kill, steal, rape, assault people (They think it is cool). If you don't understand that, than it is you who is the one without common sense.

Edited by HavocWing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A gang member is the very definition of a nihilist:

1.

of or believing in nihilism, or the total rejection of established laws and institutions: An exhibition of nihilistic art—now there's an oxymoron!

2.

embracing anarchy, terrorism, and destruction: nihilstic tactics learned in a terrorist bootcamp.

3.

Philosophy . of or believing in an extreme form of skepticism; belief in nothingness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can throw dictionary definitions around all you want, but are off the mark as far as the subject of this thread. This thread is about labeling people with in order to rob them of thier right to a fair trial and due process of the law. You can't really be so thick as to not understand that. The only way I can be sure I'm not addressing a child is that if you were you would be in schooll at this time of day in AZ and not on this forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can throw dictionary definitions around all you want, but are off the mark as far as the subject of this thread. This thread is about labeling people with in order to rob them of thier right to a fair trial and due process of the law. You can't really be so thick as to not understand that. The only way I can be sure I'm not addressing a child is that if you were you would be in schooll at this time of day in AZ and not on this forum.

No where does it state robbing them of a fair trial. You need to read the original link again. Defense lawyers would be all over robbing someone of a fair trial.

I see the guy in the link as a lunatic like James Holmes (Who is getting a fair trial).

I wonder if you are a gang member.

Edited by HavocWing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No where does it state robbing them of a fair trial. You need to read the original link again. Defense lawyers would be all over robbing someone of a fair trial.

I see the guy in the link as a lunatic like James Holmes (Who is getting a fair trial).

I wonder if you are a gang member.

Wonder away.

Gypsy-Jokers-bikers-at-Wayne-McGraths-funeral-6099867.jpg

If I am do I have rights? Terorists don't. That's what you don't seem to understand. Also, pig headed as you are I see that you ignored me when I asked you to read the story about the SWAT team I posted yesterday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder away.

Gypsy-Jokers-bikers-at-Wayne-McGraths-funeral-6099867.jpg

If I am do I have rights? Terorists don't. That's what you don't seem to understand. Also, pig headed as you are I see that you ignored me when I asked you to read the story about the SWAT team I posted yesterday.

I read your post, but that is what happens when individuals are labeled without due process, this topic is about gang members in general, no one has been named. And for the past how many decades, how have gangs/gang members gained their infamy from?

Why did you post that image? You could have just said yes. Did you post that to show that you have power in numbers and to instill fear into me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.