Hmmmmm, not sure about the benefits of this

  • Thread starter Deleted member 23273
  • Start date


The wrongun argument is used loads of times when authorities want to increase their powers.
True, I don't always buy it though. I'm not in favour of this thing as is by the way. I'd have to be convinced. I just think that it's not unreasonable for the police to be able to disarm an object that could be used for a significant amount of damage or for escaping a crime in which they are giving chase.
 
The state spies on us anyway. They spy on our internet movements, our emails, cctv and it'll only get worse in the future.

Although I am comfortable with it to an extent as the alternative is more terrorism etc.


I don't think the two are linked.

You don't have the right to drive a car, you need to take a test, you need to have insurance, you need to pay tax.

I'm not sold on the idea either mind, but if the police could prove its usefulness and more importantly its necessity I wouldn't be against it.

Are the two related? To me this seems a bizarre comparison.

Hahahahahhahaah to a f***ing imbecile maybe. All the regurgitated shite you spout is exactly the propaganda I would expect from a gullible mouth breathing fool.
 

Back
Top