How women are treated by society

a reply to: quintessentone

That's how it works, not my fault you don't like reality.

Almost all laws are open to some form interpretation/enforcement from any form of agency. That is why, in most cases, Police/Sheriffs/Highway Patrol won't pull you over for doing a few MPH over the limit. They are all to use their best judgment in every scenario they come across.

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: quintessentone

That's how it works, not my fault you don't like reality.

Almost all laws are open to some form interpretation/enforcement from any form of agency. That is why, in most cases, Police/Sheriffs/Highway Patrol won't pull you over for doing a few MPH over the limit. They are all to use their best judgment in every scenario they come across.

Well people are now suing Sheriffs for neglecting to act, so that might be a gamechanger.

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

Ya know, now that you mention it, that does fit the presentation. That one sentence was such an , ah, outlier, it made no sense at all for anyone to even ask. Other than AI of course that would just pluck a generalized statement out of a book and color it with violence against women with no realization of it's incompatibility with true history at all. Yep, I think you got it.

a reply to: quintessentone

Suing a Sheriff for not violating 2nd and 4th amendment rights? Wow, takes a special kind of re re for that.

The suits against them for violating rights will go further than those against them for not violating them.

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: quintessentone

Suing a Sheriff for not violating 2nd and 4th amendment rights? Wow, takes a special kind of re re for that.

The suits against them for violating rights will go further than those against them for not violating them.

If a Sheriff's state adopted the red flag law where does the Sheriff's political views come into doing his/her duty?

a reply to: quintessentone

Political ideology has nothing to do with it, so you can leave that one at the door bub

Law enforcement officers, in all capacity, have a certain level of discretion left to the office/individual. If said officer deems a law/search/seizure is unlawful they can choose to not enforce it.

Sure, they can be reprimanded for doing so. The office can also choose to send another officer to do said enforcement.

That is how law enforcement works, sorry if you don't like it. Not up to you or I

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: quintessentone

Political ideology has nothing to do with it, so you can leave that one at the door bub

Law enforcement officers, in all capacity, have a certain level of discretion left to the office/individual. If said officer deems a law/search/seizure is unlawful they can choose to not enforce it.

Sure, they can be reprimanded for doing so. The office can also choose to send another officer to do said enforcement.

That is how law enforcement works, sorry if you don't like it. Not up to you or I

They can't determine that a state law is unlawful, that's crazy talk.

a reply to: quintessentone

Again, just because you don't like it, does not make it any less true.

So then a cop choosing not to pull you over for speeding on a state highway is crazy? Or does that never happen?

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: quintessentone

Again, just because you don't like it, does not make it any less true.

So then a cop choosing not to pull you over for speeding on a state highway is crazy? Or does that never happen?

I don't know of any person who would like it.

a reply to: quintessentone

If police enforced every single law to the T, almost everyone would be given tickets or put in jail daily.

It's called discretion. Look it up

To be fair, everyone you know is probably just like you, a gun grabber with little to no expertise on the matter.

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: quintessentone

If police enforced every single law to the T, almost everyone would be given tickets or put in jail daily.

It's called discretion. Look it up

To be fair, everyone you know is probably just like you, a gun grabber with little to no expertise on the matter.

I'm only a gun grabber when dangerous, sick and/or violent people are allowed to keep their guns.

According to UNICEF, “The objectification and sexualization of girls in the media is linked to violence against women and girls worldwide.”

The media normalizes the act of dominance and aggression against women by constantly showcasing them as objects of pleasure. Boys and men tend to internalize that message, and it influences their subconscious biases of how they view women. They tend to legitimize violence, harassment, and anti-women views and behaviors.

www.rightsofequality.com...

And of course this is the biggie right now and the reason for regulatory laws coming soon to a site near you.

a reply to: quintessentone

That's the thing, too many people like you are going to take advantage of a red flag law and deem anyone and everyone "dangerous, sick and/or violent" without probable cause and therefore violating that persons 2nd and 4th amendment for no reason.

You, I, or any other Joe Blow off the street don't get to decide that for anyone but ourselves.

I have zero bad feelings about how modern women are treated. I almost think this is a joke post. Women have taken over our society and honestly ruined it. I for one can't wait for full AI generated porn to come out so the 50% of women making money whoring themselves on OF or doing porn will be out of a job and clueless how to make money Amy other way

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: quintessentone

That's the thing, too many people like you are going to take advantage of a red flag law and deem anyone and everyone "dangerous, sick and/or violent" without probable cause and therefore violating that persons 2nd and 4th amendment for no reason.

You, I, or any other Joe Blow off the street don't get to decide that for anyone but ourselves.

I, as a citizen, can only ask for an investigation into the incident(s), the rest is law enforcement's responsibility and duty to follow police protocols to follow the law and protect citizens. Simple to understand.

originally posted by: Hecate666

originally posted by: dust2023
a reply to: Hecate666


Your "name" and avatar suggest you are a witch or at least interested in witchcraft. Since you are of the devil and believe do what thou whilst, why should anyone believe anything you say when by your own spiritual guise lying is great as long as it benefits you?

You are right and wrong at the same time. I'll go as far as to say that I am probably the most honest person you have wver met.
To dicard my opinion because you are making stories up about my person, just because you are really religiously brainwashed ain't my problem. It just highlights the closed mindedness and nastiness of some religious folk.

I accept and speak anyone who is willing to do so with decorum. Anyone who hates me for no other reason than their masters telling them to dehumanise me, has no self awareness and is not a person I consider worth listening to either.
Yes I am a witch. Now what?
You know nothing else about me and there are a thousand other things about me who make me a worthwhile person.
Things that have nothing to do with my chosen form of belief.

But it's enough to want me dead, suffering forever in a mde up hell. Many elievers are one mind ponies and can't think for tbemsekves.

I've met believers who were able to discuss things without judgement. Those have the right mindset and I call them friends.

So have a nice life.

First issue, how do you know I am religious? I am not, at best I am agnostic and even then nothing of the sort that cares either way. Second, by choosing the name and the avatar you have chosen, you are advertising a certain image of yourself that you want people to perceive. You want people to think you worship the devil and I suppose nature. Even if you do not. Worshiping anything by definition is religious, so therefore you are far more religious than I am if I am to believe the image you are presenting.

Third issue, you present the idea that I hate women several times without any proof that I hate women other than I am contridicting your somewhat normal (and in my opinion uncurious) idea that women are the weaker sex and as such are obviously oppressed when the evidence all around me and everyone in the west is that women by and large, as a group, are not oppressed and in the larger sense of the humanity that exists in the west are actually at this point and time in history not only not oppressed, but the sex that has the upper hand.

Fourth issue, I never once said that there are not individuals that are not abused that are female, but the main OP of this thread is pretending that to be female is to be oppressed. We all know that is untrue in the "west". And the more that people such as yourself rise to defend that side of this argument the less you are taken seriously. And once again, I cannot take anyone serious that seems to have some weird idea that pretending to be "evil" or "witchy" somehow means they have more gravity in any discussion as you are by presenting that image stating that you are perfectly OK with lying as this is your main philosophy in life. Capeche? Seriously, being tied up with Satanic imagry makes it so people that are serious and truthful cannot trust you as any fool knows that the first law of yours is "do what thou whilst." And of course that includes (MAINLY) lying as often as possible as if it is getting YOU what YOU want.

a reply to: quintessentone

Here is the procedure that red flag laws "follow"

Someone calls and makes a complaint saying that "Doug" has a gun and has mental health issues

The police now take that info and go to "Doug's" house and proceeds to take his firearm without any due process (illegal search and seizure)

"Doug" is then placed on a list of people that, no matter if he has mental problems or not, cannot purchase/own/or posses a firearm. (taking away his 2nd amendment right without cause)

The "investigation" takes place only after "Doug" loses those 2 rights, if the officers conduct the unconstitutional red flag search and seizure.

All of this because someone had a problem with him. More than likely, not even what was being reported.

originally posted by: PorkChop96
a reply to: quintessentone

Here is the procedure that red flag laws "follow"

Someone calls and makes a complaint saying that "Doug" has a gun and has mental health issues

The police now take that info and go to "Doug's" house and proceeds to take his firearm without any due process (illegal search and seizure)

"Doug" is then placed on a list of people that, no matter if he has mental problems or not, cannot purchase/own/or posses a firearm. (taking away his 2nd amendment right without cause)

The "investigation" takes place only after "Doug" loses those 2 rights, if the officers conduct the unconstitutional red flag search and seizure.

All of this because someone had a problem with him. More than likely, not even what was being reported.

Someone calls and says 'Doug' is having a meltdown and waving his gun around threatening to shoot everyone's head off.

6. Guns in the home are used more often to intimidate intimates than to thwart crime

Using data from a national random-digit-dial telephone survey conducted under the direction of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center, we investigated how and when guns are used in the home. We found that guns in the home are used more often to frighten intimates than to thwart crime; other weapons are far more commonly used against intruders than are guns.

www.hsph.harvard.edu...

a reply to: Vroomfondel

Look to the womens fathers. It's likely they were abused by Dad, or Mom was, and that is what love looks like.

And/Or, that the spouse is abusive when intoxicated, and the woman believes if he just quits drinking things will improve, which can happen, and the family stays together, which is her motivation.

Its not so simple as the woman likes the abuse or is too dumb to realize it's happening.

a reply to: quintessentone

The problem, that you keep glossing over, is that anyone can call and say these things and with red flag laws they don't have to investigate until after the fact.

"Doug" could just be sitting on the couch doing nothing and "Suzie" next door can call and say that, then the events from my last comment start to unfold.


Citing a study that is a "national random-digit-dial telephone survey" means absolutely nothing when it comes to guns. Those that own them have no legal requirement to inform you or anyone on the phone of guns they have, know someone else has, or ones used for such acts as you describe.

Likely, the only responses they got are from people like you who think nobody should have guns. I don't know a single person who owns a gun that would willingly give out information regarding guns in the house to anyone, let alone a phone survey.