Informed Opinion

Fort Myers, FL

#22499 Aug 18, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>Assuming your question is actually a serious question, here are the facts demonstrating that millions of Americans have been, and continue to be, sub ejected to unequal treatment.

Section 1983 is the Section of Title 42 United States Code dealing with unequal treatment under the Constitution.

Section 1983 was enacted on April 20, 1871 as part of the Civil Rights Act of 1871, and is also known as the "Ku Klux Klan Act" because one of its primary purposes was to provide a civil remedy against the abuses that were being committed in the southern states, especially by the Ku Klux Klan.

While the existing law protected all citizens in theory, its protection in practice was unavailable to some because those persons charged with the enforcement of the laws were unable or unwilling to do so.

The number of cases that have been brought under section 1983 has dramatically increased since 1961 when the Supreme Court decided Monroe v. Pape.

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Bureau of Justice Statistics
A Report on Section 1983 Litigation

... Section 1983 litigation is a major portion of the U.S. District
Courts' civil caseloads.

... One in every ten civil lawsuits is a
Section 1983 lawsuit.

"One in every ten" .... how many millions of people do you think are represented by those hundred of thousands of lawsuits alleging "unequal treatment."

"One in every ten" ....

Now, do you want to contest those facts ?
Now.. Do I have to give you the statistics for those subjected to unequal treatment who sought redress under 42 U.S.C.§ 1981 - US Code - Section 1981: Equal rights under the law ?

(a) Statement of equal rights
All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall
have the same right in every State and Territory to make and
enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the
full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security
of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall
be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses,
and exactions of every kind, and to no other.
(b) "Make and enforce contracts" defined
For purposes of this section, the term "make and enforce
contracts" includes the making, performance, modification, and
termination of contracts, and the enjoyment of all benefits,
privileges, terms, and conditions of the contractual relationship.
(c) Protection against impairment
The rights protected by this section are protected against
impairment by nongovernmental discrimination and impairment under
color of State law.
Informed Opinion

Fort Myers, FL

#22500 Aug 18, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>Now.. Do I have to give you the statistics for those subjected to unequal treatment who sought redress under 42 U.S.C.§ 1981 - US Code - Section 1981: Equal rights under the law ?

(a) Statement of equal rights
All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall
have the same right in every State and Territory to make and
enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the
full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security
of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall
be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses,
and exactions of every kind, and to no other.
(b) "Make and enforce contracts" defined
For purposes of this section, the term "make and enforce
contracts" includes the making, performance, modification, and
termination of contracts, and the enjoyment of all benefits,
privileges, terms, and conditions of the contractual relationship.
(c) Protection against impairment
The rights protected by this section are protected against
impairment by nongovernmental discrimination and impairment under
color of State law.
How about :

42 USC § 1985 - Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights

Do you need to know how many people have been awarded relief pursuant to these unequal treatment lawsuits ?
Informed Opinion

Fort Myers, FL

#22501 Aug 18, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
How about :

42 USC § 1985 - Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights

Do you need to know how many people have been awarded relief pursuant to these unequal treatment lawsuits ?
How about :

Property Rights (Civil Rights Act of 1866, 42 U.S.C.§ 1982)

Do I need to give you the numbers of the people awarded relief pursuant to their rights to equal treatment in buying and renting properties ?
OMTE

Fitzgerald, GA

#22502 Aug 18, 2013
When wrote:
<quoted text>
Since you dragged(rofl) me into it, I will respond.
I use the term "gay" mostly, but will use queers sometimes and also homosexual or homos.
The term gay is a word the homosexuals have decided to use to describe themselves. While I do NOT believe it describes them because most everything I have read indicate most of them are "sad" about being homosexuals until they have been "enlightened and accepted into the homosexual lifestyle." Part of that is their choice to come out of the closet, most of it is their intent to rub their lifestyle into the fabric of America as a normal thing and make appearances to be normal human beings.
I don't believe giving into pervert persuasions is anywhere close to normal. We now see those who are promoting adult/child sexual relations as normal and demands their rights as being normal also. Other perversions by folks are slowing paying attention to see if they can get the same recognition as gays. All it takes is a little imagination to see where all kids will be instructed in the gay lifestyle as a normal thing.
Since the gays have decided to come out into the open and speak up, you expect all people to not reactions?? you expect all people to accept their lifestyle as normal?? You expect normal americans to roll over and play dead about the subject?? If so, then you are mistaken and have been seduced by their rhetoric, and if you have their tendencies, you might want to tell the wife while you still have time before becoming a basket case.
They chose to being it into the open and now got folks like you crying on their behalf to accept them as normal human beings, when everyone with common sense knows this is not true. So you have made your statement and we make ours. I'll use the term queers any time I choose, and I'll use the term gay anytime I choose, and I'll use the term homos anytime I choose.
If you don't like it, just skip my post.
Basically you are nothing but a pimp for gays. Go peddle your advice elsewhere.
Someone posted (may have been you) there should be an ignore button. If that was the case, IO and Oh my would be talking to themselves and the folks here in this thread could have some decent conversations about politics and candidates.
Hope none of your kids turn out to be queer people.
Dang it, When. I wanted to make the fa$$ot look stupid. No fair, "it" was talking to me. LoL. ;)
OMTE

Fitzgerald, GA

#22503 Aug 18, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
How about :
42 USC § 1985 - Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights
Do you need to know how many people have been awarded relief pursuant to these unequal treatment lawsuits ?
Dang, IO. Shutup. It ain't working.
http://www.moonbattery.com/shout_racist.jpg
OMTE

Fitzgerald, GA

#22504 Aug 18, 2013
Informed Opinion

Fort Myers, FL

#22505 Aug 18, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
How about :

Property Rights (Civil Rights Act of 1866, 42 U.S.C.§ 1982)

Do I need to give you the numbers of the people awarded relief pursuant to their rights to equal treatment in buying and renting properties ?
Here maybe this will help you understand.

It's from the FBI training manual for Civil Rights Enforcement.

Federal Civil Rights Statutes

Title 18, U.S.C., Section 249 - Hate Crimes Prevention Act

Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 - Conspiracy Against Rights

Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242 - Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law

Title 18, U.S.C., Section 245 - Federally Protected Activities

Title 18, U.S.C., Section 247 - Church Arson Prevention Act of 1996

Title 18, U.S.C., Section 248 - Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act

Title 42, U.S.C., Section 3631 - Criminal Interference with Right to Fair Housing

Title 42, U.S.C., Section 14141 - Pattern and Practice

Hate Crimes Prevention Act
This statute makes it unlawful to willfully cause bodily injury—or attempting to do so with fire, firearm, or other dangerous weapon—when 1) the crime was committed because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin of any person,

Conspiracy Against Rights
This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States,(or because of his/her having exercised the same).

Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.

Church Arson Prevention Act of 1996
Prohibits (1) intentional defacement, damage, or destruction of any religious real property, because of the religious, racial, or ethnic characteristics of that property, or (2) intentional obstruction by force or threat of force, or attempts to obstruct any person in the enjoyment of that person's free exercise of religious beliefs. If the intent of the crime is motivated for reasons of religious animosity, it must be proven that the religious real property has a sufficient connection with interstate or foreign commerce. However, if the intent of the crime is racially motivated, there is no requirement to satisfy the interstate or foreign commerce clause.

Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act
This statute prohibits (1) the use of force or threat of force or physical obstruction, to intentionally injure, intimidate or interfere with or attempt to injure, intimidate or interfere with any person or any class of persons from obtaining or providing reproductive health services;

Criminal Interference with Right to Fair Housing
This statute makes it unlawful for any individual(s), by the use of force or threatened use of force, to injure, intimidate, or interfere with (or attempt to injure, intimidate, or interfere with), any person's housing rights because of that person's race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#22506 Aug 18, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's review:
You said it's illegal to be a communist - the evidence conclusively proves it's not.
and
You said you had to register with the government if you were a communist - the evidence conclusively proves you don't.
You said that socialism and communism require a "certain" type of political structure/government -and the evidence proves that's not true either.
America is a "mixed economy", consisting of:
regulated capitalism,(although the people are losing the ability to regulate), and
socialism,(although we are fragmenting apart as personal greed is valued over collective good).
The only hope we have, so far, is that we have incorporated enough socialistic programs and enough regulation to prevent the complete accumulation of all wealth in the hands of our Oligarchy.
But, as Warren Buffet said - "There is a class war, and "We" ( the top 1%), are winning."
Denmark is socialist - and far more democratic than America. The key isn't their democracy - the key is their distribution of wealth.
Saudi Arabia is a dictatorship - and extraordinarily capitalistic. The key isn't the fact of the dictatorship - the key is the distribution of their wealth.
Socialism encourages the reasonable distribution of wealth, but fails to account for need to incorporate personal self-interest as a motivating factor.
Capitalism accounts for the motivating power of self-interest, but fails to account for the need to incorporate the needs of the group or country.
That's why only mixed economies, part socialist and part capitalistic ever succeed in the long-term.
In America - we are living proof that unregulated capitalism leads to oligarchy and tyranny.
The 1% in America long ago understood that the way to keep and grow their wealth was to seize political power.
Just like America is ruled by the 1%, Oligarchy - so is Russia.
Anyone who studied the issue understands that Russia became capitalist because the ruling 1% in Russia determined that "communism" interfered with their ability to wrest ownership of all wealth into their personal hands .
That damn "communism" interfered with the ability of a few to own everything - so they elected to become "capitalist" so the powerful could distribute the wealth amongst themselves.
Why have political power unless you enjoy the wealth ?
I recently met a Russian Billionaire who used to be a Communist Party member who hated communism because it prevented his accumulation of wealth - he understood that real power accompanies real wealth. Who runs the government isn't important because whoever they are, they subject to influence, and nothing influences more than wealth.
.... deleted for space
First, I never said it was illegal to be a communist - do your homework.
Second, I never said communists had to register with the government, do your homework.

Finally, a true and accurate statement. I did say socialism and communism require a political structure/government in order to be enforced - and the statement is true and accurate in and of itself. Your denying the necessity of that relationship does not negate its existence.

Yes, America is a form of a mixed economy, I do not believe I ever denied it. You and I most definitely disagree on how America can be called a mixed economy - your definition is skewed by your contempt for American style capitalism and your desire to install a more socialist state. When you speak of a "reasonable distribution of wealth" - you show your true colors - that can only be accomplished through confiscation and redistribution of "wealth".
===
And if you really think that the Politburo big wigs were not living a life of luxury while the Soviet people were standing in their long lines for their substandard groceries - I think BigDave had a bridge you might be interested in.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#22507 Aug 18, 2013
@When-I know you read it, thought you might like to know.

Fox is replaying Hannity's show that had Mark Levin on discussing his new book
The Liberty Amendments. It is a special show where the whole hour is devoted to the book. It just started at 9:00 if anyone is interested.
Informed Opinion

Fort Myers, FL

#22508 Aug 18, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>First, I n "wealth".
==ge you might be interested in.
Now see ... There you go ... Starting sensible ... Then jumping off the rationality cliff into WackoLand.

"Your denying the necessity of that relationship does not negate its existence."

Silliness:

I don't deny it at all. I agree with it. Whatever form of economy is selected must be enforced by the political structure -(cops, guns, and jails). The fact that all economic systems require enforcement means the form of political system itself is meaningless as to the economic system selected.

"your definition is skewed by your contempt for American style capitalism and your desire to install a more socialist state."

Again silliness, unlike Right Wing Wackos, I support American Capitalism - which is Capitalism regulated to a substantial degree to prevent its natural morphing into monopolistic economic tyranny. It's Right Wing Wackos who want to turn Unregulated Capitalism loose to destroy America's Mixed Economy that has worked well since the Great Depression 's laws enacted to control Capitalism's excesses.

"When you speak of a "reasonable distribution of wealth" - you show your true colors - that can only be accomplished through confiscation and redistribution of "wealth". "

Now you've driven over the cliff into Right Wing Wacko Land.

Any and all respected economists advise that to maintain a democracy, the distribution of wealth must be maintained within reasonable limits. When the wealth is distributed extraordinarily unequally, the elite oligarchies that are formed control the government, regardless of the technical form the government might take.

We recognized that simple fact for 100 years in America, which is why we insisted on a Progressive Income and Inheritance Taxes, and a "safety net" for the poor, handicapped, elderly and children.

It's the Right Wing Wackos that want to "redistribute" the wealth upward and push tax breaks for the rich, and inheritances taxes with $5,000,000.00 exclusions. They'll destroy democracy completely if allowed to continue to impoverish the many to make the few überrich.

As to the Russians - your opinion is self-contradictory and internally inconsistent. If communism prevents the "masses" from controlling the government then the allegedly "bread lines" were of no consequence - since they were powerless to object. Seems to me we also experienced "bread lines" in America - and we will again - if Right Winger can impoverish enough Americans.

On the other hand.. My analysis is consistent. The changeover from communism to capitalism simply changed the manner in which the elite oligarchy exercised power over the many, from one which prevented the powerful from accumulating tremendous wealth, to one which actually encouraged the accumulation of tremendous wealth by a few. What a surprise that the politically connected became the new billionaires.

I was so encouraged when you began reasonably - but so disappointed when you swerved into Right Wing WackoLand and inaccurate personal observations about me.

For what it's worth - I am a very happy capitalist (American Style)- but unlike Right Wingers - I have no desire to destroy America to make myself even wealthier.
When

Clarkesville, GA

#22509 Aug 18, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Now, now, go cash your Socialist Security check and buy your box of wine to wash down the Medicare provided Xanax, and relax.
You're getting all wound up, and when that happens, you know the nice police officer takes you back to the facility to spend a few days until your medications are re-evaluated.
By the way, the nice police officer may not be Gay just because he runs his hands over your clothing. He's just checking for things that you might use to hurt yourself, or him.
You see, not everyone is obsessed with gay sex, just you ... so relax... he's just doing his job.

You brag about being an ex-cop. I say you frisked the street bums for pleasure because everyone knows street bums have no money and no weapons.
OMTE

Fitzgerald, GA

#22510 Aug 18, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
@When-I know you read it, thought you might like to know.
Fox is replaying Hannity's show that had Mark Levin on discussing his new book
The Liberty Amendments. It is a special show where the whole hour is devoted to the book. It just started at 9:00 if anyone is interested.
If you're into books. Check this one out.
http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/cronyism-corruptio...
When

Clarkesville, GA

#22511 Aug 18, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>
Assuming your question is actually a serious question, here are the facts demonstrating that millions of Americans have been, and continue to be, sub ejected to unequal treatment.
Section 1983 is the Section of Title 42 United States Code dealing with unequal treatment under the Constitution.
Section 1983 was enacted on April 20, 1871 as part of the Civil Rights Act of 1871, and is also known as the "Ku Klux Klan Act" because one of its primary purposes was to provide a civil remedy against the abuses that were being committed in the southern states, especially by the Ku Klux Klan.
While the existing law protected all citizens in theory, its protection in practice was unavailable to some because those persons charged with the enforcement of the laws were unable or unwilling to do so.
The number of cases that have been brought under section 1983 has dramatically increased since 1961 when the Supreme Court decided Monroe v. Pape.
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Bureau of Justice Statistics
A Report on Section 1983 Litigation
... Section 1983 litigation is a major portion of the U.S. District
Courts' civil caseloads.
... One in every ten civil lawsuits is a
Section 1983 lawsuit.
"One in every ten" .... how many millions of people do you think are represented by those hundred of thousands of lawsuits alleging "unequal treatment."
"One in every ten" ....
Now, do you want to contest those facts ?

And the lawsuits against you as an ex-cop was probably because you were feeling up those street bums.

Also many or most of the lawsuits come from prisoners in jail. They have all the time in the world to file frivolous lawsuits.

"Types of Section 1983 Claims:

Typically the most common Section 1983 claims are those regarding excessive force, which are brought under the Fourth Amendments prohibition against unreasonable seizures. For all practical purposes, such claims are directly analogous to state law battery claims; the same conduct that satisfies the elements of one will typically satisfy the other.

Other common examples of Section 1983 claims with direct state law counterparts include false arrest and unreasonable searches of ones person, home or vehicle. The Fourth Amendment protects citizens against unreasonable seizures, and the case law recognizes false arrest and unjustified searches as an actionable constitutional violation."
When

Clarkesville, GA

#22512 Aug 18, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
@When-I know you read it, thought you might like to know.
Fox is replaying Hannity's show that had Mark Levin on discussing his new book
The Liberty Amendments. It is a special show where the whole hour is devoted to the book. It just started at 9:00 if anyone is interested.

Dang, it's 10 pm as I read your post. I need to keep up with topix more.
When

Clarkesville, GA

#22513 Aug 18, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
First, I never said it was illegal to be a communist - do your homework.
Second, I never said communists had to register with the government, do your homework.
Finally, a true and accurate statement. I did say socialism and communism require a political structure/government in order to be enforced - and the statement is true and accurate in and of itself. Your denying the necessity of that relationship does not negate its existence.
Yes, America is a form of a mixed economy, I do not believe I ever denied it. You and I most definitely disagree on how America can be called a mixed economy - your definition is skewed by your contempt for American style capitalism and your desire to install a more socialist state. When you speak of a "reasonable distribution of wealth" - you show your true colors - that can only be accomplished through confiscation and redistribution of "wealth".
===
And if you really think that the Politburo big wigs were not living a life of luxury while the Soviet people were standing in their long lines for their substandard groceries - I think BigDave had a bridge you might be interested in.

A little clarification on communist. We have some posing as libroid demos, their policy and agendas point them out.

As for a communist party, they must be registered in each county in each state where they plan to run a candidate. And all parties, other than the 2 ruling parties, must collect a percentage of local voter signatures in order to get on a ballot.
Those sorry socialist communist know they can only get a few votes, so instead they run as democrats and fool the unwary and uninformed.
Time for the conservatives to shed the light on the snakes under the rocks.

Reid, Pelosi, Shummer, Obama, Biden, etc., etc. Most of the demo party. There are still some blue dog demos but they are far and in between.
OMTE

Fitzgerald, GA

#22514 Aug 18, 2013
I bet this was "IO" that was filed in the "b*T*h please" file. LoL. Them queers know you what you really want to do. Huh, IO? ;)
http://izzoiz.com/2012/06/anti-gay-muslim-nyp...
When

Clarkesville, GA

#22515 Aug 18, 2013
How to turn a great America into a has been America...

"Its Official: 2012 Deficit Was $1.087T; $1T+ All 4 Yrs of Obamas 1st Term"

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/it-s-official...
When

Clarkesville, GA

#22516 Aug 18, 2013
Obama is a muslim, Graham is a fool, and McCain is senile.

"Egyptian Democratic Coalition Responds to Obama"

"Like most Egyptians, we listened with attention to your statement on Egypt's latest developments. As representatives of the non-Islamic political forces in Egypt, we believe in the same fundamental values on which the U.S. was founded. Be we also have 7,000 years of civilization and history that give us a special identity that we are fighting to keep since the Muslim Brotherhood came to power.

"Let us first inform you about who the Muslim brothers are: Theyre an unlawful organization operating outside the realm of Egyptian law, receiving foreign funding and laundering money in a flagrant breech of international law. Their aim is to rule the world through a so-called Islamic Caliphate as they believe in their absolute supremacy."

http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/Ahmed-Said-Ob...
When

Clarkesville, GA

#22517 Aug 18, 2013
"In the strongly worded editorial posted to its website, the National Review argues that despite the mounting casualties as Egypts military-backed government escalates its war with the Muslim Brotherhood, the Egyptian military is ultimately the "best hope" for a viable and eventual democratic state in the Arab worlds most populous nation."

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/national-rev...
When

Clarkesville, GA

#22518 Aug 18, 2013
IO should have paid attention to this when he was a cop......
Folks don't like having gays frisk them down.


"Ray Kelly: Judge Ruling on Stop and Frisk is 'Offensive'"

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/kelly-stop-a...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Brunswick Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
considering moving to the Brunswick area Apr 24 I used to live there 6
Anyone know? Apr 21 Snuffy 1
News Student faces weapons charge Tyler Heinze, 17, ... (Mar '11) Apr 15 UKk 19
Looking for info on Felisha Ponsell Apr 14 me2youlol 8
Part 12 Guy Heinze Jr. (May '10) Apr 12 Get_a_Clue 1,197
Miles Crews Apr 12 SumYungGuy 2
US DEPARTMENT Of Labor are worst scum We have i... Apr 1 SAY NOTHING 1
More from around the web

Brunswick People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]