UJRefugees.net

CHEEZY17 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 10, 2026 9:49 pm Question needs more context.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Who wrote: ↑Sat Jan 10, 2026 10:11 pm

CHEEZY17 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 10, 2026 9:49 pm Question needs more context.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Like Antknot you are a yes.
No context needed yes or no.

Antknot wrote: ↑Sun Jan 11, 2026 12:37 am

Who wrote: ↑Sat Jan 10, 2026 10:11 pm

CHEEZY17 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 10, 2026 9:49 pm Question needs more context.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Like Antknot you are a yes.
No context needed yes or no.

Go back and read my post. Your reading comprehension is lacking.

Who wrote: ↑Sun Jan 11, 2026 1:46 am

Antknot wrote: ↑Sun Jan 11, 2026 12:37 am

Who wrote: ↑Sat Jan 10, 2026 10:11 pm

CHEEZY17 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 10, 2026 9:49 pm Question needs more context.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Like Antknot you are a yes.
No context needed yes or no.

Go back and read my post. Your reading comprehension is lacking.

Yes, I meant bets. However “all bears are off” is a true statement:
No exceptions that makes you a yes
Incidentally I think you meant to write ‘bets’ not ‘bears’

Who wrote: ↑Sat Jan 10, 2026 10:11 pm

CHEEZY17 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 10, 2026 9:49 pm Question needs more context.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Like Antknot you are a yes.
No context needed yes or no.

CHEEZY17 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 11, 2026 4:27 am

Who wrote: ↑Sat Jan 10, 2026 10:11 pm

CHEEZY17 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 10, 2026 9:49 pm Question needs more context.
Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Like Antknot you are a yes.
No context needed yes or no.

Of course context is needed you fucking retard.

Is disobeying a law enforcement order cause for deadly force?
No, if that person is not an immediate threat to the LEO

Is disobeying a law enforcement order cause for deadly force?
Yes, if the person is a threat to the safety of the LEO or possess a threat or is in active use of that threat.

QillerDaemon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 10, 2026 7:26 pm I don't think you're going to get a decent answer here. Either you believe Renee Good was honestly trying to comply and got caught in between conflicting orders, or you believe she was a traitor to the ideas of her country and tried to run over the one cop, so deservedly got a face full of lead in payment.

There are apparently no middle grounds on this question.

Animal wrote: ↑Mon Jan 12, 2026 2:02 pm

QillerDaemon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 10, 2026 7:26 pm I don't think you're going to get a decent answer here. Either you believe Renee Good was honestly trying to comply and got caught in between conflicting orders, or you believe she was a traitor to the ideas of her country and tried to run over the one cop, so deservedly got a face full of lead in payment.

There are apparently no middle grounds on this question.

Renee Good was an instigator. She intentionally blocked the road, she was looking for a confrontation. And her "partner" was. That was clearly shown. The fact that she parked sideways in the road also clearly shows her intentions. She was trying to antagonize the cops and get a reaction.

I don't think she tried to kill the officer or run over him, but he was clearly in front of her car with his hands on the hood and all of the officers there were telling her to get out of the car. She pushed through the officer that shot her and the rest will have to be decided by a jury. We can never really know what her intentions were and we won't ever really know what thoughts were going through the cop's mind. Was he pissed because two queers were talking shit to him while he was doing his job? Was he pissed that these same disrespectful women were ignoring orders from law enforcement? had he been through all he could take in the past few hours from them and others behaving like them? We will find out some of it.