Discussion:
[OT] Journalism in Canada
Add Reply
Rhino
2020-06-29 14:39:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
You might be interested in seeing this video of Rebel News trying to do
reporting from City Hall in Toronto, which is currently occupied by a
combination of aboriginals and blacks with the apparent acquiescence of
Toronto mayor John Tory.

https://www.rebelnews.com/showdown_rebel_news_takes_on_antifa_mob_mall_cops_and_politically_correct_police?utm_campaign=el_cityhall_yt_prem_6_29_20&utm_medium=email&utm_source=therebel

Apparently, it *is* still possible for a reporter to report - provided
he hires seven security guards, brings a lawyer, and happens upon a
reasonable police officer. Otherwise, not so much....
--
Rhino
BTR1701
2020-06-29 17:28:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rhino
You might be interested in seeing this video of Rebel News trying to do
reporting from City Hall in Toronto, which is currently occupied by a
combination of aboriginals and blacks with the apparent acquiescence of
Toronto mayor John Tory.
https://www.rebelnews.com/showdown_rebel_news_takes_on_antifa_mob_mall_cops_an
d_politically_correct_police?utm_campaign=el_cityhall_yt_prem_6_29_20&utm_medi
um=email&utm_source=therebel
Apparently, it *is* still possible for a reporter to report - provided
he hires seven security guards, brings a lawyer, and happens upon a
reasonable police officer. Otherwise, not so much....
LOL! The people who have illegally taken over a public square do not
have the laws enforced on them, but if someone goes to report on it,
they get ejected by the cops for 'creating a disturbance'.

You couldn't write a movie script this absurd.
trotsky
2020-06-29 17:33:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
You might be interested in seeing this video of Rebel News trying to do
reporting from City Hall in Toronto, which is currently occupied by a
combination of aboriginals and blacks with the apparent acquiescence of
Toronto mayor John Tory.
https://www.rebelnews.com/showdown_rebel_news_takes_on_antifa_mob_mall_cops_an
d_politically_correct_police?utm_campaign=el_cityhall_yt_prem_6_29_20&utm_medi
um=email&utm_source=therebel
Apparently, it *is* still possible for a reporter to report - provided
he hires seven security guards, brings a lawyer, and happens upon a
reasonable police officer. Otherwise, not so much....
LOL! The people who have illegally taken over a public square do not
have the laws enforced on them, but if someone goes to report on it,
they get ejected by the cops for 'creating a disturbance'.
You couldn't write a movie script this absurd.
So true, it reminds me of how the Golden Girls got cancelled.
Rhino
2020-06-29 18:05:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
You might be interested in seeing this video of Rebel News trying to do
reporting from City Hall in Toronto, which is currently occupied by a
combination of aboriginals and blacks with the apparent acquiescence of
Toronto mayor John Tory.
https://www.rebelnews.com/showdown_rebel_news_takes_on_antifa_mob_mall_cops_an
d_politically_correct_police?utm_campaign=el_cityhall_yt_prem_6_29_20&utm_medi
um=email&utm_source=therebel
Apparently, it *is* still possible for a reporter to report - provided
he hires seven security guards, brings a lawyer, and happens upon a
reasonable police officer. Otherwise, not so much....
LOL! The people who have illegally taken over a public square do not
have the laws enforced on them, but if someone goes to report on it,
they get ejected by the cops for 'creating a disturbance'.
I liked Ezra Levant's characterization of the City Hall security people
as "mall cops". He's got me wondering what, if any, authority they
actually have about anything. They dress like police, except for the
weapons, and they give orders as if they have authority but I'm not
clear if they have any actual power or just have a police-like uniform
and the tendency of Canadians to do what they're told.
Post by BTR1701
You couldn't write a movie script this absurd.
The "casting" was pretty crazy too. The one black woman kept talking
about the land being taken from her ancestors but the ones actually
claiming that the land underneath Toronto are Indians; I'm not aware of
any "nations" of blacks residing in Ontario in those days. And the woman
who insisted that the Rebel folks leave her "elder" alone was as white
as anyone I've ever seen; if she has any aboriginal heritage, it's been
overwhelmed by her white genes.

But in an era where men can decide they are women, women can decide they
are men, and Rachel Dolezal is black, I figure pretty much any absurdity
will pass as reality now, at least in "progressive" circles.

I sure hope voters hold John Tory accountable for this when Toronto next
has mayoral elections.
--
Rhino
BTR1701
2020-06-29 19:30:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rhino
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
You might be interested in seeing this video of Rebel News trying to do
reporting from City Hall in Toronto, which is currently occupied by a
combination of aboriginals and blacks with the apparent acquiescence of
Toronto mayor John Tory.
Apparently, it *is* still possible for a reporter to report - provided
he hires seven security guards, brings a lawyer, and happens upon a
reasonable police officer. Otherwise, not so much....
LOL! The people who have illegally taken over a public square do not
have the laws enforced on them, but if someone goes to report on it,
they get ejected by the cops for 'creating a disturbance'.
I liked Ezra Levant's characterization of the City Hall security people
as "mall cops". He's got me wondering what, if any, authority they
actually have about anything. They dress like police, except for the
weapons, and they give orders as if they have authority but I'm not
clear if they have any actual power or just have a police-like uniform
and the tendency of Canadians to do what they're told.
The cop he was talking to near the end was ridiculous. He was like, "You
can go in and do your news report but if one of the unwashed
proto-commies explodes and gets violent, you'll be trespassed and forced
to leave."

Say what the actual fuck now?

He's literally saying that if *they* break the law, he's going to blame
it on the reporter and charge him with a crime? How about if someone
violently explodes, *they* get charged with a crime and get kicked out?
Because, you know, they'll be the ones actually breaking the law.

It's like we're well through the looking glass in this world now.
Rhino
2020-06-29 20:29:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
You might be interested in seeing this video of Rebel News trying to do
reporting from City Hall in Toronto, which is currently occupied by a
combination of aboriginals and blacks with the apparent acquiescence of
Toronto mayor John Tory.
Apparently, it *is* still possible for a reporter to report - provided
he hires seven security guards, brings a lawyer, and happens upon a
reasonable police officer. Otherwise, not so much....
LOL! The people who have illegally taken over a public square do not
have the laws enforced on them, but if someone goes to report on it,
they get ejected by the cops for 'creating a disturbance'.
I liked Ezra Levant's characterization of the City Hall security people
as "mall cops". He's got me wondering what, if any, authority they
actually have about anything. They dress like police, except for the
weapons, and they give orders as if they have authority but I'm not
clear if they have any actual power or just have a police-like uniform
and the tendency of Canadians to do what they're told.
The cop he was talking to near the end was ridiculous. He was like, "You
can go in and do your news report but if one of the unwashed
proto-commies explodes and gets violent, you'll be trespassed and forced
to leave."
Say what the actual fuck now?
He's literally saying that if *they* break the law, he's going to blame
it on the reporter and charge him with a crime? How about if someone
violently explodes, *they* get charged with a crime and get kicked out?
Because, you know, they'll be the ones actually breaking the law.
It's like we're well through the looking glass in this world now.
Apparently, police retirements are WAY up this year over last - at least
in some US jurisdictions, not sure about here - and I can totally
understand that. I can barely imagine being a police officer in this
climate where the ones with the megaphones accuse you of being racist,
oppressive bullies and murderers. All they need is that accusation,
without a shred of proof, and the media then piles on in the
"progressives" favour so that every police action is an obvious act of
oppression, racism or even attempted or actual murder. Mayors and police
chiefs are bending a knee to the mob and not even pretending to follow
the law, otherwise you wouldn't be getting these "occupations", rioting,
looting, and arson in the first place let alone letting the mob do its
thing unimpeded.

Police officers are getting whipsawed between the mob and their bosses
who clearly DON'T have their backs. That makes for working conditions
that must be damned near intolerable for most of them and massively
frustrating for the rest.
--
Rhino
Ed Stasiak
2020-06-30 01:27:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rhino
Rhino
Apparently, police retirements are WAY up this year over last
The "defund the police!" policy ought to dovetail nicely with the Dem's "ban guns!" platform...

https://nypost.com/2020/06/27/272-nypd-cops-file-for-retirement-since-floyd-protests/
June 27, 2020

272 uniformed NYPD cops file for retirement after George Floyd death

Cops are hanging up their handcuffs in huge numbers.

The flurry of Finest farewells began after the police-involved killing of George Floyd on May 25, with 272 uniformed cops putting in retirement papers from then through June 24, the NYPD says.

That’s a 49 percent spike from the 183 officers who filed during the same period last year, according to the department.

An NYPD source suggested the recent departures could signal a coming crisis for the 36,000-member department, which also faces a $1 billion budget reduction amid the “defund the police” furor.

“We are worried about a surge in attrition reducing our headcount beyond what we can sustain without new recruits, and are afraid the City Council has not taken the surge into account,” he said.

Police Benevolent Association president Patrick Lynch said cops are “at their breaking point, whether they have 20 years on the job or only two. We are all asking the same question: ‘How can we keep doing our job in this environment?’ And that is exactly what the anti-cop crowd wants. If we have no cops because no one wants to be a cop, they will have achieved their ultimate goal.”

Ed Mullins, president of the Sergeants Benevolent Association, said an “exodus” from the NYPD has begun. He said nearly 80 of his members have recently filed for retirement, and that morale is “at the lowest levels I’ve seen in 38 years.”

The fiery union leader added, “People have had enough and no longer feel it’s worth risking their personal well-being for a thankless position.”

“There is no leadership, no direction, no training for new policies,” he said. “Department brass is paralyzed (and) too afraid to uphold their sworn oath in fear of losing their jobs. Sadly, the people of this city will soon experience what New York City was like in the 1980s.”

Outrage over Floyd’s death sparked nationwide protests, and some NYPD officers see themselves as collateral damage.

“It’s an all-out war on cops and we have no support,” said one veteran Brooklyn cop, who is retiring next month. “I wanted to wait for my 30th anniversary in October, but the handwriting is on the wall.”

Many men and women in blue are fed up, feeling targeted and frustrated that they are expected to fight crime with fewer tools than ever, while getting no backing from politicians, injured in protests, and constantly scrutinized, according to agitated officers and angry police unions.

The weary rank and file also wonder if one bad decision on the job could get them arrested and charged with a crime.
BTR1701
2020-06-30 02:31:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by Rhino
Rhino
Apparently, police retirements are WAY up this year over last
The "defund the police!" policy ought to dovetail nicely with the Dem's
"ban guns!" platform...
Have you noticed the recent talking points surfacing on social media and
with the talking heads on leftist-sympathetic TV outlets that "We can't
have meaningful police reform until we get rid of gun ownership because
one of the main reasons cops feel the need to be militaristic and react
with force so quickly is their worry about people being armed."

They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
Post by Ed Stasiak
272 uniformed NYPD cops file for retirement after George Floyd death
Cops are hanging up their handcuffs in huge numbers.
The flurry of Finest farewells began after the police-involved killing
of George Floyd on May 25, with 272 uniformed cops putting in
retirement papers from then through June 24, the NYPD says.
That’s a 49% spike from the 183 officers who filed during the same
period last year, according to the department.
An NYPD source suggested the recent departures could signal a coming
crisis for the 36,000-member department, which also faces a $1 billion
budget reduction amid the "defund the police" furor.
Police Benevolent Association president Patrick Lynch said cops are "at
their breaking point, whether they have 20 years on the job or only
two. We are all asking the same question: 'How can we keep doing our
job in this environment?'
The girlfriend is a LAPD Robbery-Homicide detective and she was planning
on staying on the job another 10 years at least. She's now actively
looking into her early retirement options and a new line of work. In her
opinion, there's no upside to working in an environment where you can be
acting completely within both policy and the law and still end up
charged with murder because the politicians are scared of protesters.
She says the message from city hall and the chief's floor these days is
basically "You all are on your own." No support whatsoever.

Thing is, she's of Colombian descent, so she's a 'diversity' poster-girl
for the department. A latina female working the elite RHD squad is a PC
win for the department so she told me they're having a mild freakout
over her leaving and possibly talking to the wrong people (media) about
how bad it's gotten. They're offering her all sorts of incentives to
stay.
Rhino
2020-06-30 03:54:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by Rhino
Rhino
Apparently, police retirements are WAY up this year over last
The "defund the police!" policy ought to dovetail nicely with the Dem's
"ban guns!" platform...
Have you noticed the recent talking points surfacing on social media and
with the talking heads on leftist-sympathetic TV outlets that "We can't
have meaningful police reform until we get rid of gun ownership because
one of the main reasons cops feel the need to be militaristic and react
with force so quickly is their worry about people being armed."
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
Post by Ed Stasiak
272 uniformed NYPD cops file for retirement after George Floyd death
Cops are hanging up their handcuffs in huge numbers.
The flurry of Finest farewells began after the police-involved killing
of George Floyd on May 25, with 272 uniformed cops putting in
retirement papers from then through June 24, the NYPD says.
That’s a 49% spike from the 183 officers who filed during the same
period last year, according to the department.
An NYPD source suggested the recent departures could signal a coming
crisis for the 36,000-member department, which also faces a $1 billion
budget reduction amid the "defund the police" furor.
Police Benevolent Association president Patrick Lynch said cops are "at
their breaking point, whether they have 20 years on the job or only
two. We are all asking the same question: 'How can we keep doing our
job in this environment?'
The girlfriend is a LAPD Robbery-Homicide detective and she was planning
on staying on the job another 10 years at least. She's now actively
looking into her early retirement options and a new line of work. In her
opinion, there's no upside to working in an environment where you can be
acting completely within both policy and the law and still end up
charged with murder because the politicians are scared of protesters.
She says the message from city hall and the chief's floor these days is
basically "You all are on your own." No support whatsoever.
Thing is, she's of Colombian descent, so she's a 'diversity' poster-girl
for the department. A latina female working the elite RHD squad is a PC
win for the department so she told me they're having a mild freakout
over her leaving and possibly talking to the wrong people (media) about
how bad it's gotten. They're offering her all sorts of incentives to
stay.
How seriously could ANY officer take the incentives if they feel like
they're walking around with a target on their backs and EVERYONE is free
to fire at them, including the usual mopes AND the media AND the
politicians AND their own management? I wouldn't be inclined to be
awfully trusting in their shoes, especially with all the acts of
spinelessness we've seen in the last few weeks by politicians and police
management.
--
Rhino
Adam H. Kerman
2020-06-30 05:21:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by Rhino
Rhino
Apparently, police retirements are WAY up this year over last
The "defund the police!" policy ought to dovetail nicely with the Dem's
"ban guns!" platform...
Have you noticed the recent talking points surfacing on social media and
with the talking heads on leftist-sympathetic TV outlets that "We can't
have meaningful police reform until we get rid of gun ownership because
one of the main reasons cops feel the need to be militaristic and react
with force so quickly is their worry about people being armed."
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
Post by Ed Stasiak
272 uniformed NYPD cops file for retirement after George Floyd death
Cops are hanging up their handcuffs in huge numbers.
The flurry of Finest farewells began after the police-involved killing
of George Floyd on May 25, with 272 uniformed cops putting in
retirement papers from then through June 24, the NYPD says.
That’s a 49% spike from the 183 officers who filed during the same
period last year, according to the department.
An NYPD source suggested the recent departures could signal a coming
crisis for the 36,000-member department, which also faces a $1 billion
budget reduction amid the "defund the police" furor.
Police Benevolent Association president Patrick Lynch said cops are "at
their breaking point, whether they have 20 years on the job or only
two. We are all asking the same question: 'How can we keep doing our
job in this environment?'
The girlfriend is a LAPD Robbery-Homicide detective and she was planning
on staying on the job another 10 years at least. She's now actively
looking into her early retirement options and a new line of work. In her
opinion, there's no upside to working in an environment where you can be
acting completely within both policy and the law and still end up
charged with murder because the politicians are scared of protesters.
She says the message from city hall and the chief's floor these days is
basically "You all are on your own." No support whatsoever.
Thing is, she's of Colombian descent, so she's a 'diversity' poster-girl
for the department. A latina female working the elite RHD squad is a PC
win for the department so she told me they're having a mild freakout
over her leaving and possibly talking to the wrong people (media) about
how bad it's gotten. They're offering her all sorts of incentives to
stay.
Is one of those incentives full support of police officers who are just
doing their jobs the right way?
shawn
2020-06-30 06:49:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by Rhino
Rhino
Apparently, police retirements are WAY up this year over last
The "defund the police!" policy ought to dovetail nicely with the Dem's
"ban guns!" platform...
Have you noticed the recent talking points surfacing on social media and
with the talking heads on leftist-sympathetic TV outlets that "We can't
have meaningful police reform until we get rid of gun ownership because
one of the main reasons cops feel the need to be militaristic and react
with force so quickly is their worry about people being armed."
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening. At
least not in the way you are suggesting because I've been doing a lot
of watching of the media the last few weeks and it's mostly liberal
oriented and that subject just isn't coming up. Sure you'll get the
occasional crazy idea but it's not a subject that's catching fire
unlike everything else that's going on. So I'm sure you can point to
some examples but it won't be anything like the wave that you seem to
be suggesting so it's another one of those things that we hear about
and then it gets dropped because there really wasn't a ground swell of
support for the idea.
Post by BTR1701
Post by Ed Stasiak
272 uniformed NYPD cops file for retirement after George Floyd death
I hope that covers the cops that abuse their position. Without
cleaning house of those sorts of cops nothing is going to change.
Post by BTR1701
Post by Ed Stasiak
Cops are hanging up their handcuffs in huge numbers.
The flurry of Finest farewells began after the police-involved killing
of George Floyd on May 25, with 272 uniformed cops putting in
retirement papers from then through June 24, the NYPD says.
That’s a 49% spike from the 183 officers who filed during the same
period last year, according to the department.
An NYPD source suggested the recent departures could signal a coming
crisis for the 36,000-member department, which also faces a $1 billion
budget reduction amid the "defund the police" furor.
Police Benevolent Association president Patrick Lynch said cops are "at
their breaking point, whether they have 20 years on the job or only
two. We are all asking the same question: 'How can we keep doing our
job in this environment?'
The girlfriend is a LAPD Robbery-Homicide detective and she was planning
on staying on the job another 10 years at least. She's now actively
looking into her early retirement options and a new line of work. In her
opinion, there's no upside to working in an environment where you can be
acting completely within both policy and the law and still end up
charged with murder because the politicians are scared of protesters.
She says the message from city hall and the chief's floor these days is
basically "You all are on your own." No support whatsoever.
Thing is, she's of Colombian descent, so she's a 'diversity' poster-girl
for the department. A latina female working the elite RHD squad is a PC
win for the department so she told me they're having a mild freakout
over her leaving and possibly talking to the wrong people (media) about
how bad it's gotten. They're offering her all sorts of incentives to
stay.
Early retirement is always a great deal as you end up getting paid and
yet be free to do whatever you want with your time. Including finding
yet another job and earning an extra paycheck. So it's little surprise
anyone that has the option doesn't at least consider it when the
environment gets a bit tough.
Ed Stasiak
2020-06-30 14:19:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.

https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/

Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.

Loading Image...

https://www.stevegruber.com/2020/06/armed-protestors-confront-motorcyclist-in-michigan-while-police-watch-and-do-nothing/?utm_medium=ppt&utm_source=pushnotification

(note: the video of the incident has been scrubbed from YouTube…)
trotsky
2020-06-30 14:48:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
Perhaps if we were defended by anonyshits and sockpuppets it would be
better.
Rhino
2020-06-30 15:13:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50058809473_bed791e2cb_c.jpg
https://www.stevegruber.com/2020/06/armed-protestors-confront-motorcyclist-in-michigan-while-police-watch-and-do-nothing/?utm_medium=ppt&utm_source=pushnotification
(note: the video of the incident has been scrubbed from YouTube…)
There's a saying among police officers that correctly observes that
"when trouble is only seconds away, the police are minutes away". That's
inevitable in a world where it's not practical to put a police officer,
let alone a police station, on every corner.

I think the "progressives" have decided that this is far too much
protection for citizens. They are trying to change the narrative so that
the reality becomes: "Don't even BOTHER to try resisting the mob: we've
abolished the police so no one is coming to help EVER." The best way
they can achieve THAT is to "defund" the police, coupled with taking
away privately-owned guns. But the privately-owned guns aren't even the
major factor in the equation. How long can a private home-owner hold out
if the police are simply never going to come?

It's one thing if you can count on the police to be there in a few
minutes. You can probably hold off a few bad guys for a few minutes with
a handgun, shotgun or rifle and a magazine or two of ammo. But how many
weapons and how much ammo would you need to hold off bad guys INDEFINITELY?
--
Rhino
shawn
2020-06-30 15:48:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:13:53 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50058809473_bed791e2cb_c.jpg
https://www.stevegruber.com/2020/06/armed-protestors-confront-motorcyclist-in-michigan-while-police-watch-and-do-nothing/?utm_medium=ppt&utm_source=pushnotification
(note: the video of the incident has been scrubbed from YouTube…)
There's a saying among police officers that correctly observes that
"when trouble is only seconds away, the police are minutes away". That's
inevitable in a world where it's not practical to put a police officer,
let alone a police station, on every corner.
I think the "progressives" have decided that this is far too much
protection for citizens. They are trying to change the narrative so that
the reality becomes: "Don't even BOTHER to try resisting the mob: we've
abolished the police so no one is coming to help EVER." The best way
they can achieve THAT is to "defund" the police, coupled with taking
away privately-owned guns. But the privately-owned guns aren't even the
major factor in the equation. How long can a private home-owner hold out
if the police are simply never going to come?
The problem is that it's entirely too easy to find examples of the
police behaving badly. That's creating an environment where it's easy
to make a call to defund the police because what we have now appears
to make it too easy for a bad apple to stay employed.

I do like what Beau of the Fifth Column had to say yesterday about the
difference between county LEOs and city LEOS where one may have to be
self reliant because backup could be tens of minutes away. Basically
the point was that county LEOs focused on the spirit of the law
instead of the letter because the people they were protecting could
easily vote their boss out if the LEOs pissed off the voters. In a
large city that ability to hold easily hold LEOs accountable is taken
away and so the interaction between LEOs and citizens can be
different.

Post by Rhino
It's one thing if you can count on the police to be there in a few
minutes. You can probably hold off a few bad guys for a few minutes with
a handgun, shotgun or rifle and a magazine or two of ammo. But how many
weapons and how much ammo would you need to hold off bad guys INDEFINITELY?
None because there aren't bad guys out there waiting to attack your
home indefinitely or even at all in most cases. The people that are
thieves in general don't want to enter homes where there is someone,
whether they own a gun or not.
Rhino
2020-06-30 16:25:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:13:53 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50058809473_bed791e2cb_c.jpg
https://www.stevegruber.com/2020/06/armed-protestors-confront-motorcyclist-in-michigan-while-police-watch-and-do-nothing/?utm_medium=ppt&utm_source=pushnotification
(note: the video of the incident has been scrubbed from YouTube…)
There's a saying among police officers that correctly observes that
"when trouble is only seconds away, the police are minutes away". That's
inevitable in a world where it's not practical to put a police officer,
let alone a police station, on every corner.
I think the "progressives" have decided that this is far too much
protection for citizens. They are trying to change the narrative so that
the reality becomes: "Don't even BOTHER to try resisting the mob: we've
abolished the police so no one is coming to help EVER." The best way
they can achieve THAT is to "defund" the police, coupled with taking
away privately-owned guns. But the privately-owned guns aren't even the
major factor in the equation. How long can a private home-owner hold out
if the police are simply never going to come?
The problem is that it's entirely too easy to find examples of the
police behaving badly. That's creating an environment where it's easy
to make a call to defund the police because what we have now appears
to make it too easy for a bad apple to stay employed.
I do like what Beau of the Fifth Column had to say yesterday about the
difference between county LEOs and city LEOS where one may have to be
self reliant because backup could be tens of minutes away. Basically
the point was that county LEOs focused on the spirit of the law
instead of the letter because the people they were protecting could
easily vote their boss out if the LEOs pissed off the voters. In a
large city that ability to hold easily hold LEOs accountable is taken
away and so the interaction between LEOs and citizens can be
different. http://youtu.be/XM5FN1mN-qQ
Post by Rhino
It's one thing if you can count on the police to be there in a few
minutes. You can probably hold off a few bad guys for a few minutes with
a handgun, shotgun or rifle and a magazine or two of ammo. But how many
weapons and how much ammo would you need to hold off bad guys INDEFINITELY?
None because there aren't bad guys out there waiting to attack your
home indefinitely or even at all in most cases. The people that are
thieves in general don't want to enter homes where there is someone,
whether they own a gun or not.
And yet they do. I'm sure you've heard of home invasions where the bad
guys wantonly attack a home that they KNOW is occupied, then attack the
residents, steal their valuables, and sometimes beat, rape or even
murder the residents. And many a burglar has tried to steal from a house
that may well be occupied but hope to get away with it by means of
stealth, only to come upon an unexpected resident that is not willing to
have their property - or themselves - violated, leading to violent
altercations.
--
Rhino
shawn
2020-06-30 17:24:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:25:33 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:13:53 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50058809473_bed791e2cb_c.jpg
https://www.stevegruber.com/2020/06/armed-protestors-confront-motorcyclist-in-michigan-while-police-watch-and-do-nothing/?utm_medium=ppt&utm_source=pushnotification
(note: the video of the incident has been scrubbed from YouTube…)
There's a saying among police officers that correctly observes that
"when trouble is only seconds away, the police are minutes away". That's
inevitable in a world where it's not practical to put a police officer,
let alone a police station, on every corner.
I think the "progressives" have decided that this is far too much
protection for citizens. They are trying to change the narrative so that
the reality becomes: "Don't even BOTHER to try resisting the mob: we've
abolished the police so no one is coming to help EVER." The best way
they can achieve THAT is to "defund" the police, coupled with taking
away privately-owned guns. But the privately-owned guns aren't even the
major factor in the equation. How long can a private home-owner hold out
if the police are simply never going to come?
The problem is that it's entirely too easy to find examples of the
police behaving badly. That's creating an environment where it's easy
to make a call to defund the police because what we have now appears
to make it too easy for a bad apple to stay employed.
I do like what Beau of the Fifth Column had to say yesterday about the
difference between county LEOs and city LEOS where one may have to be
self reliant because backup could be tens of minutes away. Basically
the point was that county LEOs focused on the spirit of the law
instead of the letter because the people they were protecting could
easily vote their boss out if the LEOs pissed off the voters. In a
large city that ability to hold easily hold LEOs accountable is taken
away and so the interaction between LEOs and citizens can be
different. http://youtu.be/XM5FN1mN-qQ
Post by Rhino
It's one thing if you can count on the police to be there in a few
minutes. You can probably hold off a few bad guys for a few minutes with
a handgun, shotgun or rifle and a magazine or two of ammo. But how many
weapons and how much ammo would you need to hold off bad guys INDEFINITELY?
None because there aren't bad guys out there waiting to attack your
home indefinitely or even at all in most cases. The people that are
thieves in general don't want to enter homes where there is someone,
whether they own a gun or not.
And yet they do. I'm sure you've heard of home invasions where the bad
guys wantonly attack a home that they KNOW is occupied, then attack the
residents, steal their valuables, and sometimes beat, rape or even
murder the residents. And many a burglar has tried to steal from a house
that may well be occupied but hope to get away with it by means of
stealth, only to come upon an unexpected resident that is not willing to
have their property - or themselves - violated, leading to violent
altercations.
Sure. It happens but it's not exactly a common thing. Thieves know
that if someone is home there's a fair chance that they could get
caught whether by an armed resident or the police if the resident
calls 911. So it's only the more deranged types that are going to go
looking for homes where they know someone is home. Now for rapists,
that's a different matter.
Rhino
2020-06-30 17:50:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:25:33 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:13:53 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50058809473_bed791e2cb_c.jpg
https://www.stevegruber.com/2020/06/armed-protestors-confront-motorcyclist-in-michigan-while-police-watch-and-do-nothing/?utm_medium=ppt&utm_source=pushnotification
(note: the video of the incident has been scrubbed from YouTube…)
There's a saying among police officers that correctly observes that
"when trouble is only seconds away, the police are minutes away". That's
inevitable in a world where it's not practical to put a police officer,
let alone a police station, on every corner.
I think the "progressives" have decided that this is far too much
protection for citizens. They are trying to change the narrative so that
the reality becomes: "Don't even BOTHER to try resisting the mob: we've
abolished the police so no one is coming to help EVER." The best way
they can achieve THAT is to "defund" the police, coupled with taking
away privately-owned guns. But the privately-owned guns aren't even the
major factor in the equation. How long can a private home-owner hold out
if the police are simply never going to come?
The problem is that it's entirely too easy to find examples of the
police behaving badly. That's creating an environment where it's easy
to make a call to defund the police because what we have now appears
to make it too easy for a bad apple to stay employed.
I do like what Beau of the Fifth Column had to say yesterday about the
difference between county LEOs and city LEOS where one may have to be
self reliant because backup could be tens of minutes away. Basically
the point was that county LEOs focused on the spirit of the law
instead of the letter because the people they were protecting could
easily vote their boss out if the LEOs pissed off the voters. In a
large city that ability to hold easily hold LEOs accountable is taken
away and so the interaction between LEOs and citizens can be
different. http://youtu.be/XM5FN1mN-qQ
Post by Rhino
It's one thing if you can count on the police to be there in a few
minutes. You can probably hold off a few bad guys for a few minutes with
a handgun, shotgun or rifle and a magazine or two of ammo. But how many
weapons and how much ammo would you need to hold off bad guys INDEFINITELY?
None because there aren't bad guys out there waiting to attack your
home indefinitely or even at all in most cases. The people that are
thieves in general don't want to enter homes where there is someone,
whether they own a gun or not.
And yet they do. I'm sure you've heard of home invasions where the bad
guys wantonly attack a home that they KNOW is occupied, then attack the
residents, steal their valuables, and sometimes beat, rape or even
murder the residents. And many a burglar has tried to steal from a house
that may well be occupied but hope to get away with it by means of
stealth, only to come upon an unexpected resident that is not willing to
have their property - or themselves - violated, leading to violent
altercations.
Sure. It happens but it's not exactly a common thing.
Burglaries are rare? Really? As for home invasions, we've had them in
towns around here, in quiet, peaceful Southern Ontario Canada so I have
to believe they're a good bit more common in the Excited States of
America....
Post by shawn
Thieves know
that if someone is home there's a fair chance that they could get
caught whether by an armed resident or the police if the resident
calls 911.
In the brave new world the "progressives" are yearning for - and
starting to implement - calling 911 will only get them an unarmed social
worker whose sole action will be to ask to talk to the perpetrator of
the crime in the hope that they can "talk him or her down". I would rate
that an EXTREMELY ineffective response to the situation.
Post by shawn
So it's only the more deranged types that are going to go
looking for homes where they know someone is home.
Alright then, nothing to worry about! After all, deranged types are
extremely few and far between now that they've closed most of the mental
health facilities and let the patients out....
Post by shawn
Now for rapists,
that's a different matter.
Are you acknowledging that rapists would be problematic in a world
without armed police?
--
Rhino
shawn
2020-06-30 18:08:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 13:50:46 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:25:33 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:13:53 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50058809473_bed791e2cb_c.jpg
https://www.stevegruber.com/2020/06/armed-protestors-confront-motorcyclist-in-michigan-while-police-watch-and-do-nothing/?utm_medium=ppt&utm_source=pushnotification
(note: the video of the incident has been scrubbed from YouTube…)
There's a saying among police officers that correctly observes that
"when trouble is only seconds away, the police are minutes away". That's
inevitable in a world where it's not practical to put a police officer,
let alone a police station, on every corner.
I think the "progressives" have decided that this is far too much
protection for citizens. They are trying to change the narrative so that
the reality becomes: "Don't even BOTHER to try resisting the mob: we've
abolished the police so no one is coming to help EVER." The best way
they can achieve THAT is to "defund" the police, coupled with taking
away privately-owned guns. But the privately-owned guns aren't even the
major factor in the equation. How long can a private home-owner hold out
if the police are simply never going to come?
The problem is that it's entirely too easy to find examples of the
police behaving badly. That's creating an environment where it's easy
to make a call to defund the police because what we have now appears
to make it too easy for a bad apple to stay employed.
I do like what Beau of the Fifth Column had to say yesterday about the
difference between county LEOs and city LEOS where one may have to be
self reliant because backup could be tens of minutes away. Basically
the point was that county LEOs focused on the spirit of the law
instead of the letter because the people they were protecting could
easily vote their boss out if the LEOs pissed off the voters. In a
large city that ability to hold easily hold LEOs accountable is taken
away and so the interaction between LEOs and citizens can be
different. http://youtu.be/XM5FN1mN-qQ
Post by Rhino
It's one thing if you can count on the police to be there in a few
minutes. You can probably hold off a few bad guys for a few minutes with
a handgun, shotgun or rifle and a magazine or two of ammo. But how many
weapons and how much ammo would you need to hold off bad guys INDEFINITELY?
None because there aren't bad guys out there waiting to attack your
home indefinitely or even at all in most cases. The people that are
thieves in general don't want to enter homes where there is someone,
whether they own a gun or not.
And yet they do. I'm sure you've heard of home invasions where the bad
guys wantonly attack a home that they KNOW is occupied, then attack the
residents, steal their valuables, and sometimes beat, rape or even
murder the residents. And many a burglar has tried to steal from a house
that may well be occupied but hope to get away with it by means of
stealth, only to come upon an unexpected resident that is not willing to
have their property - or themselves - violated, leading to violent
altercations.
Sure. It happens but it's not exactly a common thing.
Burglaries are rare? Really? As for home invasions, we've had them in
towns around here, in quiet, peaceful Southern Ontario Canada so I have
to believe they're a good bit more common in the Excited States of
America....
Don't be an idiot. You moved the conversation from thefts to thefts
where the perpetrators went looking for occupied homes intending to
harm the residents. That's not exactly common unlike thefts in
general.
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
Thieves know
that if someone is home there's a fair chance that they could get
caught whether by an armed resident or the police if the resident
calls 911.
In the brave new world the "progressives" are yearning for - and
starting to implement - calling 911 will only get them an unarmed social
worker whose sole action will be to ask to talk to the perpetrator of
the crime in the hope that they can "talk him or her down". I would rate
that an EXTREMELY ineffective response to the situation.
That's a great straw man but what I hear them asking for is to have
alternatives available to more appropriately respond to 911 calls. So
if a call comes in about someone threatening to commit suicide instead
of sending out a patrol officer they could send out someone with
actual training in how to handle such a person. So there would still
be plenty of patrol officers but they don't get sent out on calls they
are ill-prepared to handle.
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
So it's only the more deranged types that are going to go
looking for homes where they know someone is home.
Alright then, nothing to worry about! After all, deranged types are
extremely few and far between now that they've closed most of the mental
health facilities and let the patients out....
Wasn't one of the things people were calling for was expanding care
for those same patients so hopefully those people would get care
before they become a threat to anyone including themselves.
BTR1701
2020-06-30 19:59:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 13:50:46 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:25:33 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:13:53 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s
enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it
to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50058809473_bed791e2cb_c.jpg
https://www.stevegruber.com/2020/06/armed-protestors-confront-motorcycl
ist-in-michigan-while-police-watch-and-do-nothing/?utm_medium=ppt&utm_s
ource=pushnotification
(note: the video of the incident has been scrubbed from YouTube
)
There's a saying among police officers that correctly observes that
"when trouble is only seconds away, the police are minutes away". That's
inevitable in a world where it's not practical to put a police officer,
let alone a police station, on every corner.
I think the "progressives" have decided that this is far too much
protection for citizens. They are trying to change the narrative so that
the reality becomes: "Don't even BOTHER to try resisting the mob: we've
abolished the police so no one is coming to help EVER." The best way
they can achieve THAT is to "defund" the police, coupled with taking
away privately-owned guns. But the privately-owned guns aren't even the
major factor in the equation. How long can a private home-owner hold out
if the police are simply never going to come?
The problem is that it's entirely too easy to find examples of the
police behaving badly. That's creating an environment where it's easy
to make a call to defund the police because what we have now appears
to make it too easy for a bad apple to stay employed.
I do like what Beau of the Fifth Column had to say yesterday about the
difference between county LEOs and city LEOS where one may have to be
self reliant because backup could be tens of minutes away. Basically
the point was that county LEOs focused on the spirit of the law
instead of the letter because the people they were protecting could
easily vote their boss out if the LEOs pissed off the voters. In a
large city that ability to hold easily hold LEOs accountable is taken
away and so the interaction between LEOs and citizens can be
different. http://youtu.be/XM5FN1mN-qQ
Post by Rhino
It's one thing if you can count on the police to be there in a few
minutes. You can probably hold off a few bad guys for a few minutes with
a handgun, shotgun or rifle and a magazine or two of ammo. But how many
weapons and how much ammo would you need to hold off bad guys INDEFINITELY?
None because there aren't bad guys out there waiting to attack your
home indefinitely or even at all in most cases. The people that are
thieves in general don't want to enter homes where there is someone,
whether they own a gun or not.
And yet they do. I'm sure you've heard of home invasions where the bad
guys wantonly attack a home that they KNOW is occupied, then attack the
residents, steal their valuables, and sometimes beat, rape or even
murder the residents. And many a burglar has tried to steal from a house
that may well be occupied but hope to get away with it by means of
stealth, only to come upon an unexpected resident that is not willing to
have their property - or themselves - violated, leading to violent
altercations.
Sure. It happens but it's not exactly a common thing.
Burglaries are rare? Really? As for home invasions, we've had them in
towns around here, in quiet, peaceful Southern Ontario Canada so I have
to believe they're a good bit more common in the Excited States of
America....
Don't be an idiot. You moved the conversation from thefts to thefts
where the perpetrators went looking for occupied homes intending to
harm the residents. That's not exactly common unlike thefts in
general.
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
Thieves know
that if someone is home there's a fair chance that they could get
caught whether by an armed resident or the police if the resident
calls 911.
In the brave new world the "progressives" are yearning for - and
starting to implement - calling 911 will only get them an unarmed social
worker whose sole action will be to ask to talk to the perpetrator of
the crime in the hope that they can "talk him or her down". I would rate
that an EXTREMELY ineffective response to the situation.
That's a great straw man but what I hear them asking for is to have
alternatives available to more appropriately respond to 911 calls. So
if a call comes in about someone threatening to commit suicide instead
of sending out a patrol officer they could send out someone with
actual training in how to handle such a person.
What sort of idiot would want to respond to someone trying to kill
themselves without the ability to defend himself?

Suicidal people, by definition, have nothing to lose. It would be a
simple matter for a the person to turn the gun or knife on the social
worker first before killing himself.
trotsky
2020-06-30 20:04:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
What sort of idiot would want to respond to someone trying to kill
themselves without the ability to defend himself?
Suicidal people, by definition, have nothing to lose. It would be a
simple matter for a the person to turn the gun or knife on the social
worker first before killing himself.
Do you have any examples of this happening or is this another Golden
Girls situation?
Rhino
2020-07-01 02:01:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 13:50:46 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:25:33 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:13:53 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50058809473_bed791e2cb_c.jpg
https://www.stevegruber.com/2020/06/armed-protestors-confront-motorcyclist-in-michigan-while-police-watch-and-do-nothing/?utm_medium=ppt&utm_source=pushnotification
(note: the video of the incident has been scrubbed from YouTube…)
There's a saying among police officers that correctly observes that
"when trouble is only seconds away, the police are minutes away". That's
inevitable in a world where it's not practical to put a police officer,
let alone a police station, on every corner.
I think the "progressives" have decided that this is far too much
protection for citizens. They are trying to change the narrative so that
the reality becomes: "Don't even BOTHER to try resisting the mob: we've
abolished the police so no one is coming to help EVER." The best way
they can achieve THAT is to "defund" the police, coupled with taking
away privately-owned guns. But the privately-owned guns aren't even the
major factor in the equation. How long can a private home-owner hold out
if the police are simply never going to come?
The problem is that it's entirely too easy to find examples of the
police behaving badly. That's creating an environment where it's easy
to make a call to defund the police because what we have now appears
to make it too easy for a bad apple to stay employed.
I do like what Beau of the Fifth Column had to say yesterday about the
difference between county LEOs and city LEOS where one may have to be
self reliant because backup could be tens of minutes away. Basically
the point was that county LEOs focused on the spirit of the law
instead of the letter because the people they were protecting could
easily vote their boss out if the LEOs pissed off the voters. In a
large city that ability to hold easily hold LEOs accountable is taken
away and so the interaction between LEOs and citizens can be
different. http://youtu.be/XM5FN1mN-qQ
Post by Rhino
It's one thing if you can count on the police to be there in a few
minutes. You can probably hold off a few bad guys for a few minutes with
a handgun, shotgun or rifle and a magazine or two of ammo. But how many
weapons and how much ammo would you need to hold off bad guys INDEFINITELY?
None because there aren't bad guys out there waiting to attack your
home indefinitely or even at all in most cases. The people that are
thieves in general don't want to enter homes where there is someone,
whether they own a gun or not.
And yet they do. I'm sure you've heard of home invasions where the bad
guys wantonly attack a home that they KNOW is occupied, then attack the
residents, steal their valuables, and sometimes beat, rape or even
murder the residents. And many a burglar has tried to steal from a house
that may well be occupied but hope to get away with it by means of
stealth, only to come upon an unexpected resident that is not willing to
have their property - or themselves - violated, leading to violent
altercations.
Sure. It happens but it's not exactly a common thing.
Burglaries are rare? Really? As for home invasions, we've had them in
towns around here, in quiet, peaceful Southern Ontario Canada so I have
to believe they're a good bit more common in the Excited States of
America....
Don't be an idiot. You moved the conversation from thefts to thefts
where the perpetrators went looking for occupied homes intending to
harm the residents. That's not exactly common unlike thefts in
general.
I've been having one hell of a day so I have not researched the numbers
to get the frequency of home invasions anywhere but I know we've had
them here and I'm sure there are more of them in the US. I *assume*
they're less frequent than regular burglaries where the burglar just
HOPES no one is home (or they're all heavy sleepers) but not having the
numbers, who knows? Maybe home invasions are MORE common than burglaries
by now....
Post by shawn
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
Thieves know
that if someone is home there's a fair chance that they could get
caught whether by an armed resident or the police if the resident
calls 911.
In the brave new world the "progressives" are yearning for - and
starting to implement - calling 911 will only get them an unarmed social
worker whose sole action will be to ask to talk to the perpetrator of
the crime in the hope that they can "talk him or her down". I would rate
that an EXTREMELY ineffective response to the situation.
That's a great straw man but what I hear them asking for is to have
alternatives available to more appropriately respond to 911 calls. So
if a call comes in about someone threatening to commit suicide instead
of sending out a patrol officer they could send out someone with
actual training in how to handle such a person. So there would still
be plenty of patrol officers but they don't get sent out on calls they
are ill-prepared to handle.
Having talked to plenty of ordinary people who were calling about
considerably more mundane problems than what 911 operators hear, my
confidence level is NOT high that people calling 911 give a complete and
accurate account of what is going on so that the dispatcher can send
exactly the right person to help. I'll bet any 911 operator will have
stories about extensive conversations just to figure out what the
problem being reported actually is. I'd also bet good money that their
best efforts often turned out to be completely mistaken because of
misleading responses by the caller or critical omitted information that
showed the operator did NOT understand the real situation - sometimes
with tragic results. Some of that might be because of the operator
jumping to conclusions but I'd bet the lion's share of it is that
average person just isn't terribly clear or articulate about what a
given problem is.

Having said that, I'm sure some cities will try what you're saying and
there will surely be some real tragedies as a result as well as some
successes. Assuming the bosses aren't complete idiots, they will revise
the policies as needed until they make sense. Then again, given the high
percentage of idiots in office these days and their apparent
determination to double-down on their stupidity time and time again, who
can say? Maybe they will maintain stupid policies that get first
responders killed until quite a few are dead or even until no one is
willing to be a first responder in that city. I truly don't know at this
point.
Post by shawn
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
looking for homes where they know someone is home.
Alright then, nothing to worry about! After all, deranged types are
extremely few and far between now that they've closed most of the mental
health facilities and let the patients out....
Wasn't one of the things people were calling for was expanding care
for those same patients so hopefully those people would get care
before they become a threat to anyone including themselves.
I seem to remember lots of liberals calling for the closure of mental
health institutions because they kept people out of the mainstream of
society and thereby diminished their freedom. (They also argued that
there were too many cases of abuse of the mentally fragile in those
facilities. And others argued that a lot of money could be saved to
lavish on the destitute and disadvantaged by closing down expensive
mental health facilities.)
--
Rhino
Ed Stasiak
2020-06-30 17:52:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
shawn
Post by Rhino
Rhino
And yet they do. I'm sure you've heard of home invasions where
the bad guys wantonly attack a home that they KNOW is occupied
Sure. It happens but it's not exactly a common thing.
Feel free to roll the dice with your life but don’t try to force me
into a suicide pact with you.
shawn
2020-06-30 18:09:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 10:52:42 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
Post by Rhino
Rhino
And yet they do. I'm sure you've heard of home invasions where
the bad guys wantonly attack a home that they KNOW is occupied
Sure. It happens but it's not exactly a common thing.
Feel free to roll the dice with your life but don’t try to force me
into a suicide pact with you.
Hmm, it's a suicide pact that myself, my relatives, my friends and
everyone I know has managed to survive for decades. As I said it isn't
exactly a common thing for any burglar to go looking for an occupied
home to rob just so they can hurt the residents.
Ed Stasiak
2020-06-30 18:35:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
shawn
Post by shawn
Ed Stasiak
Feel free to roll the dice with your life but don’t try to force
me into a suicide pact with you.
Hmm, it's a suicide pact that myself, my relatives, my friends
and everyone I know has managed to survive for decades.
And I’m all for people _choosing_ to remain unarmed if they want
but don’t try and force your choice on me.
Post by shawn
As I said it isn't exactly a common thing for any burglar to go
looking for an occupied home to rob just so they can hurt the
residents.
And yet that’s exactly what George “The Gentle Giant” Floyd did,
when he posed as a water dept. worker to force his way into an
occupied home and pressed a gun to a pregnant woman’s stomach.

Loading Image...

But I’ll agree that most criminal encounters happen outside the
home but then the anti-gun fundies also want to eliminate open
and concealed carry, leaving law abiding citizens defenseless
both inside and outside the home, while at the same time calling
for the police to be defunded/disbanded while allowing rioters
to run rampant, as happened last week in Lansing MI.

Loading Image...
shawn
2020-06-30 19:46:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:35:25 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
Post by shawn
Ed Stasiak
Feel free to roll the dice with your life but don’t try to force
me into a suicide pact with you.
Hmm, it's a suicide pact that myself, my relatives, my friends
and everyone I know has managed to survive for decades.
And I’m all for people _choosing_ to remain unarmed if they want
but don’t try and force your choice on me.
I'm not, but I'm also not going to support you taking out your gun and
pointing it at other unarmed people because you have this paranoid
belief that isn't shown to be based on facts that someone in that
crowd might hurt you or your property.
BTR1701
2020-06-30 20:24:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
shawn
Post by shawn
Ed Stasiak
Feel free to roll the dice with your life but don’t try to force
me into a suicide pact with you.
Hmm, it's a suicide pact that myself, my relatives, my friends
and everyone I know has managed to survive for decades.
And I’m all for people _choosing_ to remain unarmed if they want
but don’t try and force your choice on me.
Post by shawn
As I said it isn't exactly a common thing for any burglar to go
looking for an occupied home to rob just so they can hurt the
residents.
And yet that’s exactly what George “The Gentle Giant” Floyd did,
when he posed as a water dept. worker to force his way into an
occupied home and pressed a gun to a pregnant woman’s stomach.
https://i.postimg.cc/tTRb8X3z/George-Floyd.jpg
Hey, hey, now. We'll have none of that. Saint Floyd has been officially
canonized and no recitation of mere facts will be allowed to sully that.
FPP
2020-06-30 20:41:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
BTR1701
2020-06-30 19:56:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 10:52:42 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
Post by Rhino
Rhino
And yet they do. I'm sure you've heard of home invasions where
the bad guys wantonly attack a home that they KNOW is occupied
Sure. It happens but it's not exactly a common thing.
Feel free to roll the dice with your life but don’t try to force me
into a suicide pact with you.
Hmm, it's a suicide pact that myself, my relatives, my friends and
everyone I know has managed to survive for decades.
Great. You've rolled the dice and come up a winner.

Doesn't mean you have the right to force the rest of us to play the game
with you.
shawn
2020-06-30 20:47:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 10:52:42 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
Post by Rhino
Rhino
And yet they do. I'm sure you've heard of home invasions where
the bad guys wantonly attack a home that they KNOW is occupied
Sure. It happens but it's not exactly a common thing.
Feel free to roll the dice with your life but don’t try to force me
into a suicide pact with you.
Hmm, it's a suicide pact that myself, my relatives, my friends and
everyone I know has managed to survive for decades.
Great. You've rolled the dice and come up a winner.
Doesn't mean you have the right to force the rest of us to play the game
with you.
Yeah, if it means you are going to go pointing guns at unarmed people
that aren't threatening you then you shouldn't be allowed to own a
weapon. Now, if you can use them responsibly I've got no problem with
gun ownership. They been around in my family for as far back as I can
remember but no one took out a gun and pointed it at unarmed people
walking by their home unlike the woman did in the video.
Rhino
2020-07-01 01:19:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 10:52:42 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
Post by Rhino
Rhino
And yet they do. I'm sure you've heard of home invasions where
the bad guys wantonly attack a home that they KNOW is occupied
Sure. It happens but it's not exactly a common thing.
Feel free to roll the dice with your life but don’t try to force me
into a suicide pact with you.
Hmm, it's a suicide pact that myself, my relatives, my friends and
everyone I know has managed to survive for decades.
Great. You've rolled the dice and come up a winner.
Doesn't mean you have the right to force the rest of us to play the game
with you.
Yeah, if it means you are going to go pointing guns at unarmed people
that aren't threatening you then you shouldn't be allowed to own a
weapon. Now, if you can use them responsibly I've got no problem with
gun ownership. They been around in my family for as far back as I can
remember but no one took out a gun and pointed it at unarmed people
walking by their home unlike the woman did in the video.
I've watched a lengthy (10 minute) interview with the man who had the
rifle and he insisted that he NEVER pointed the gun at anyone. He only
produced the gun in the first place when the mob smashed down the gate
on the private street in the first place, looking for the mayor. They
were on the wrong street but didn't realize it at first. They made many
threats toward him, his wife, his family, his property and even his dog.
I'd say he had every right to show them, by holding the rifle, that he
was prepared to defend himself. He has since received many death threats
and threats to burn down his office and so forth, so much so that he
doesn't answer his phones because the threats are virtually nonstop. (Or
at least they were virtually nonstop when he recorded the interview.)
And this guy was actually in the process of defending a young man who'd
been handled roughly by the local police.

The DA of Los Angeles did the same thing when a mob came knocking on her
door the night of the primary a few weeks back. I never heard word one
about that being wrong or illegal, even in uber-liberal LA.

People ARE allowed to defend themselves and their homes, including in
St. Louis and LA. (Other cities/states, not so much.)
--
Rhino
BTR1701
2020-07-01 03:48:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rhino
The DA of Los Angeles did the same thing when a mob came knocking on her
door the night of the primary a few weeks back. I never heard word one
about that being wrong or illegal, even in uber-liberal LA.
It was actually Jackie Lacey's husband who came to the door with a gun
and it did result in a lot of blowback for her, at least locally. The
woke 'progressive' radicals don't like Lacey much, even though she's a
Democrat and a black woman, because she actually does her best to
prosecute criminals and put them away, despite being continually
undermined by the Marxists in Sacramento.
trotsky
2020-07-01 10:28:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
The DA of Los Angeles did the same thing when a mob came knocking on her
door the night of the primary a few weeks back. I never heard word one
about that being wrong or illegal, even in uber-liberal LA.
It was actually Jackie Lacey's husband who came to the door with a gun
and it did result in a lot of blowback for her, at least locally. The
woke 'progressive' radicals don't like Lacey much, even though she's a
Democrat and a black woman, because she actually does her best to
prosecute criminals and put them away, despite being continually
undermined by the Marxists in Sacramento.
And yet most would agree Cagney was much better than Lacey.
FPP
2020-07-01 10:44:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by trotsky
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
The DA of Los Angeles did the same thing when a mob came knocking on her
door the night of the primary a few weeks back. I never heard word one
about that being wrong or illegal, even in uber-liberal LA.
It was actually Jackie Lacey's husband who came to the door with a gun
and it did result in a lot of blowback for her, at least locally. The
woke 'progressive' radicals don't like Lacey much, even though she's a
Democrat and a black woman, because she actually does her best to
prosecute criminals and put them away, despite being continually
undermined by the Marxists in Sacramento.
And yet most would agree Cagney was much better than Lacey.
She was a Marxist, though. Thanny will back me up... he keeps up on all
the Marxists for us.
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
Rhino
2020-07-01 12:34:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
The DA of Los Angeles did the same thing when a mob came knocking on her
door the night of the primary a few weeks back. I never heard word one
about that being wrong or illegal, even in uber-liberal LA.
It was actually Jackie Lacey's husband who came to the door with a gun
and it did result in a lot of blowback for her, at least locally. The
woke 'progressive' radicals don't like Lacey much, even though she's a
Democrat and a black woman, because she actually does her best to
prosecute criminals and put them away, despite being continually
undermined by the Marxists in Sacramento.
I know there was some blowback - EVERYTHING results in blowback these
days! - but her husband wasn't arrested or charged as I understand it
meaning that everyone involved knew she hadn't committed a crime and
couldn't even pretend otherwise.
--
Rhino
The Horny Goat
2020-07-01 16:01:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
The DA of Los Angeles did the same thing when a mob came knocking on her
door the night of the primary a few weeks back. I never heard word one
about that being wrong or illegal, even in uber-liberal LA.
It was actually Jackie Lacey's husband who came to the door with a gun
and it did result in a lot of blowback for her, at least locally. The
woke 'progressive' radicals don't like Lacey much, even though she's a
Democrat and a black woman, because she actually does her best to
prosecute criminals and put them away, despite being continually
undermined by the Marxists in Sacramento.
Pardon my confusion but isn't "does her best to prosecute criminals
and put them away" the primary mission of a District Attorney?

Or am I somehow confused on the concept?
BTR1701
2020-07-01 19:15:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by The Horny Goat
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
The DA of Los Angeles did the same thing when a mob came knocking
on her door the night of the primary a few weeks back. I never
heard word one about that being wrong or illegal, even in uber-
liberal LA.
It was actually Jackie Lacey's husband who came to the door with a gun
and it did result in a lot of blowback for her, at least locally. The
woke 'progressive' radicals don't like Lacey much, even though she's a
Democrat and a black woman, because she actually does her best to
prosecute criminals and put them away, despite being continually
undermined by the Marxists in Sacramento.
Pardon my confusion but isn't "does her best to prosecute criminals
and put them away" the primary mission of a District Attorney?
In a sane world, yes. But San Francisco, for example, has a
dyed-in-the-wool Marxist for a D.A. (the son of two Weather Underground
terrorists) whose stated goal is to *not* prosecute people. And D.A. is
'progressive' cities who put people behind bars for the crimes they
commit are very unpopular.
Post by The Horny Goat
Or am I somehow confused on the concept?
No, you're just not a lunatic, which increasingly is becoming a
disadvantage in this 'progressive' world.
FPP
2020-07-01 23:29:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by The Horny Goat
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
The DA of Los Angeles did the same thing when a mob came knocking
on her door the night of the primary a few weeks back. I never
heard word one about that being wrong or illegal, even in uber-
liberal LA.
It was actually Jackie Lacey's husband who came to the door with a gun
and it did result in a lot of blowback for her, at least locally. The
woke 'progressive' radicals don't like Lacey much, even though she's a
Democrat and a black woman, because she actually does her best to
prosecute criminals and put them away, despite being continually
undermined by the Marxists in Sacramento.
Pardon my confusion but isn't "does her best to prosecute criminals
and put them away" the primary mission of a District Attorney?
In a sane world, yes. But San Francisco, for example, has a
dyed-in-the-wool Marxist for a D.A. (the son of two Weather Underground
terrorists) whose stated goal is to *not* prosecute people. And D.A. is
'progressive' cities who put people behind bars for the crimes they
commit are very unpopular.
Post by The Horny Goat
Or am I somehow confused on the concept?
No, you're just not a lunatic, which increasingly is becoming a
disadvantage in this 'progressive' world.
Why not ask the family of Ahmaud Arbery about not charging people for
crimes?
I mean, they let them off the hook for over 2 months - until the video
leaked out.

Don't like that one, do we?
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
The Horny Goat
2020-07-03 05:08:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by The Horny Goat
Pardon my confusion but isn't "does her best to prosecute criminals
and put them away" the primary mission of a District Attorney?
In a sane world, yes. But San Francisco, for example, has a
dyed-in-the-wool Marxist for a D.A. (the son of two Weather Underground
terrorists) whose stated goal is to *not* prosecute people. And D.A. is
'progressive' cities who put people behind bars for the crimes they
commit are very unpopular.
With the greatest of respect would it be better if he/she put people
behind bars for the crimes they DIDN'T commit be better? I very much
think not.
BTR1701
2020-07-03 05:21:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by The Horny Goat
Post by BTR1701
Post by The Horny Goat
Pardon my confusion but isn't "does her best to prosecute criminals
and put them away" the primary mission of a District Attorney?
In a sane world, yes. But San Francisco, for example, has a
dyed-in-the-wool Marxist for a D.A. (the son of two Weather Underground
terrorists) whose stated goal is to *not* prosecute people. Any D.A. in
'progressive' cities who put people behind bars for the crimes they
commit are very unpopular.
With the greatest of respect would it be better if he/she put people
behind bars for the crimes they DIDN'T commit be better? I very much
think not.
No, the radical 'progressives' don't want people imprisoned for anything.
FPP
2020-07-03 05:35:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by The Horny Goat
Post by BTR1701
Post by The Horny Goat
Pardon my confusion but isn't "does her best to prosecute criminals
and put them away" the primary mission of a District Attorney?
In a sane world, yes. But San Francisco, for example, has a
dyed-in-the-wool Marxist for a D.A. (the son of two Weather Underground
terrorists) whose stated goal is to *not* prosecute people. Any D.A. in
'progressive' cities who put people behind bars for the crimes they
commit are very unpopular.
With the greatest of respect would it be better if he/she put people
behind bars for the crimes they DIDN'T commit be better? I very much
think not.
No, the radical 'progressives' don't want people imprisoned for anything.
Sure. More idiocy from the fake loyer. He just says things now...
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
trotsky
2020-07-03 10:00:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by The Horny Goat
Post by BTR1701
Post by The Horny Goat
Pardon my confusion but isn't "does her best to prosecute criminals
and put them away" the primary mission of a District Attorney?
In a sane world, yes. But San Francisco, for example, has a
dyed-in-the-wool Marxist for a D.A. (the son of two Weather Underground
terrorists) whose stated goal is to *not* prosecute people. Any D.A. in
'progressive' cities who put people behind bars for the crimes they
commit are very unpopular.
With the greatest of respect would it be better if he/she put people
behind bars for the crimes they DIDN'T commit be better? I very much
think not.
No, the radical 'progressives' don't want people imprisoned for anything.
Cite, liar?

BTR1701
2020-06-30 19:55:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:13:53 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
It's one thing if you can count on the police to be there in a few
minutes. You can probably hold off a few bad guys for a few minutes with
a handgun, shotgun or rifle and a magazine or two of ammo. But how many
weapons and how much ammo would you need to hold off bad guys INDEFINITELY?
None because there aren't bad guys out there waiting to attack your
home indefinitely or even at all in most cases.
There's an entire crowd that keeps showing up in Beverly Hills chanting,
"Eat the rich!" and trying to march through those tony neighborhoods and
do who knows what to the houses there.

They've been stopped every time by the Beverly Hills Police Department,
whose city council has shown absolutely no desire to defund them or tell
them to stand down. The city council knows who it's answerable to-- the
residents of those fancy homes, not the mob-- and on the Night of Fire
and Looting, when Melrose and Fairfax were destroyed and its citizens
beaten bloody, Beverly Hills right next door remained unscathed. Why?
Because the cops were told to enforce the goddam law by the mayor rather
than told to stand down like weak sister Garcetti did with the LAPD.
It's not like the rioters and looters didn't try. They showed up ready
to attack and loot Rodeo Drive only to be quite firmly told "no" in no
uncertain terms by a wall of police, equipped with an LRAD sound cannon.
trotsky
2020-06-30 20:01:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:13:53 -0400, Rhino
Post by Rhino
It's one thing if you can count on the police to be there in a few
minutes. You can probably hold off a few bad guys for a few minutes with
a handgun, shotgun or rifle and a magazine or two of ammo. But how many
weapons and how much ammo would you need to hold off bad guys INDEFINITELY?
None because there aren't bad guys out there waiting to attack your
home indefinitely or even at all in most cases.
There's an entire crowd that keeps showing up in Beverly Hills chanting,
"Eat the rich!" and trying to march through those tony neighborhoods
What?
Ed Stasiak
2020-06-30 16:10:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rhino
Rhino
Post by shawn
Ed Stasiak
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity
and Americans will be left defenseless.
There's a saying among police officers that correctly observes that
”when trouble is only seconds away, the police are minutes away".
“When seconds count, the police are only minutes away”.
Post by Rhino
I think the "progressives" have decided that this is far too much
protection for citizens.
I don’t believe progressives have really put any logical thought
into the matter, they’ve effectively become children throwing a
tantrum and demanding both the dissolution of the police along
with gun control simply because that is Leftist dogma.

As we’ve seen with comments numerous times here from other
posters as well as what’s going on in the CHAZ Zone and that
park in Minneapolis, they simply can’t grasp the concept that
this will come back around to bite THEM on the ass.
Rhino
2020-06-30 16:34:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by Rhino
Rhino
Post by shawn
Ed Stasiak
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity
and Americans will be left defenseless.
There's a saying among police officers that correctly observes that
”when trouble is only seconds away, the police are minutes away".
“When seconds count, the police are only minutes away”.
Post by Rhino
I think the "progressives" have decided that this is far too much
protection for citizens.
I don’t believe progressives have really put any logical thought
into the matter, they’ve effectively become children throwing a
tantrum and demanding both the dissolution of the police along
with gun control simply because that is Leftist dogma.
As we’ve seen with comments numerous times here from other
posters as well as what’s going on in the CHAZ Zone and that
park in Minneapolis, they simply can’t grasp the concept that
this will come back around to bite THEM on the ass.
I agree that the average "mostly peaceful protestor" isn't thinking
things through but there are always people behind the scenes who are
trying to figure out how to manipulate events to their advantage. If I
was a hardcore leftist, I would absolute jizz myself at the thought of
the police being "defunded" (i.e. abolished) because it would take away
their biggest challenge in conquering those darned "Neanderthals" in the
suburbs who won't "get with the program". If the police aren't going to
come to the rescue of those people, then the mob itself can very
possibly disarm the poor saps who thought they only had to defend
themselves for a few minutes until the police arrived.

They'd still have problems with those who never expected the police to
come and are prepared to put on a sustained fight to defend themselves,
their families, and their property but the "progressives" would still
have gained some ground on the "Neanderthals".
--
Rhino
BTR1701
2020-06-30 19:40:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rhino
Rhino
Post by shawn
Ed Stasiak
Combine the above policy with the "defund the police!" insanity
and Americans will be left defenseless.
There's a saying among police officers that correctly observes that
"when trouble is only seconds away, the police are minutes away".
"When seconds count, the police are only minutes away".
Post by Rhino
I think the "progressives" have decided that this is far too much
protection for citizens.
I don't believe progressives have really put any logical thought
into the matter, they've effectively become children throwing a
tantrum and demanding both the dissolution of the police along
with gun control simply because that is Leftist dogma.
But they require protection for themselves, as we see with the Marxists
on the Minneapolis city council, who-- even as they dismantle the police
protections for the average citizen-- demand that they themselves be
protected by armed private security. At taxpayer expense, of course.
FPP
2020-06-30 20:27:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
Rhino
Post by shawn
Ed Stasiak
Combine the above policy with the "defund the police!" insanity
and Americans will be left defenseless.
There's a saying among police officers that correctly observes that
"when trouble is only seconds away, the police are minutes away".
"When seconds count, the police are only minutes away".
Post by Rhino
I think the "progressives" have decided that this is far too much
protection for citizens.
I don't believe progressives have really put any logical thought
into the matter, they've effectively become children throwing a
tantrum and demanding both the dissolution of the police along
with gun control simply because that is Leftist dogma.
But they require protection for themselves, as we see with the Marxists
on the Minneapolis city council, who-- even as they dismantle the police
protections for the average citizen-- demand that they themselves be
protected by armed private security. At taxpayer expense, of course.
Just like Trump did to you. What's changed?
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
Ed Stasiak
2020-06-30 21:19:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
BTR1701
Post by shawn
Ed Stasiak
I don't believe progressives have really put any logical thought
into the matter, they've effectively become children throwing a
tantrum and demanding both the dissolution of the police along
with gun control simply because that is Leftist dogma.
But they require protection for themselves, as we see with the Marxists
on the Minneapolis city council, who-- even as they dismantle the police
protections for the average citizen-- demand that they themselves be
protected by armed private security. At taxpayer expense, of course.
“Liberal bigots are the ones who trouble me most. I distrust the extremes.
Scratch a conservative and you find someone who prefers the past over
any future. Scratch a liberal and find a closet aristocrat.”

— Frank Herbert —
BTR1701
2020-06-30 22:06:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
BTR1701
Post by shawn
Ed Stasiak
I don't believe progressives have really put any logical thought
into the matter, they've effectively become children throwing a
tantrum and demanding both the dissolution of the police along
with gun control simply because that is Leftist dogma.
But they require protection for themselves, as we see with the Marxists
on the Minneapolis city council, who-- even as they dismantle the police
protections for the average citizen-- demand that they themselves be
protected by armed private security. At taxpayer expense, of course.
"Liberal bigots are the ones who trouble me most. I distrust the
extremes. Scratch a conservative and you find someone who prefers
the past over any future. Scratch a liberal and find a closet
aristocrat."
— Frank Herbert —
"That white person that you see calling himself a liberal is the most
dangerous thing in the entire Western Hemisphere." --Malcolm X
FPP
2020-07-01 06:31:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
BTR1701
Post by shawn
Ed Stasiak
I don't believe progressives have really put any logical thought
into the matter, they've effectively become children throwing a
tantrum and demanding both the dissolution of the police along
with gun control simply because that is Leftist dogma.
But they require protection for themselves, as we see with the Marxists
on the Minneapolis city council, who-- even as they dismantle the police
protections for the average citizen-- demand that they themselves be
protected by armed private security. At taxpayer expense, of course.
"Liberal bigots are the ones who trouble me most. I distrust the
extremes. Scratch a conservative and you find someone who prefers
the past over any future. Scratch a liberal and find a closet
aristocrat."
— Frank Herbert —
"That white person that you see calling himself a liberal is the most
dangerous thing in the entire Western Hemisphere." --Malcolm X
Sure... and we all know how Herbert felt about words...

“Words can carry any burden we wish. All that’s required is agreement
and a tradition upon which to build.” ― Frank Herbert, God Emperor of Dune
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
BTR1701
2020-07-01 06:59:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
BTR1701
Post by shawn
Ed Stasiak
I don't believe progressives have really put any logical thought
into the matter, they've effectively become children throwing a
tantrum and demanding both the dissolution of the police along
with gun control simply because that is Leftist dogma.
But they require protection for themselves, as we see with the Marxists
on the Minneapolis city council, who-- even as they dismantle the police
protections for the average citizen-- demand that they themselves be
protected by armed private security. At taxpayer expense, of course.
"Liberal bigots are the ones who trouble me most. I distrust the
extremes. Scratch a conservative and you find someone who prefers
the past over any future. Scratch a liberal and find a closet
aristocrat."
--Frank Herbert--
"That white person that you see calling himself a liberal is the most
dangerous thing in the entire Western Hemisphere." --Malcolm X
Sure... and we all know how Herbert felt about words...
"Words can carry any burden we wish. All that's required is agreement
and a tradition upon which to build." — Frank Herbert, God Emperor of Dune
You responded to a quote referencing Malcolm X, not Herbert. Looks like this time
it took you all of 10 minutes to contradict your own made-up Usenet rules.
FPP
2020-07-01 10:42:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
BTR1701
Post by shawn
Ed Stasiak
I don't believe progressives have really put any logical thought
into the matter, they've effectively become children throwing a
tantrum and demanding both the dissolution of the police along
with gun control simply because that is Leftist dogma.
But they require protection for themselves, as we see with the Marxists
on the Minneapolis city council, who-- even as they dismantle the police
protections for the average citizen-- demand that they themselves be
protected by armed private security. At taxpayer expense, of course.
"Liberal bigots are the ones who trouble me most. I distrust the
extremes. Scratch a conservative and you find someone who prefers
the past over any future. Scratch a liberal and find a closet
aristocrat."
--Frank Herbert--
"That white person that you see calling himself a liberal is the most
dangerous thing in the entire Western Hemisphere." --Malcolm X
Sure... and we all know how Herbert felt about words...
"Words can carry any burden we wish. All that's required is agreement
and a tradition upon which to build." — Frank Herbert, God Emperor of Dune
You responded to a quote referencing Malcolm X, not Herbert. Looks like this time
it took you all of 10 minutes to contradict your own made-up Usenet rules.
No, I responded to the Herbert quote WITH another Herbert quote.

I responded through your post because I have "Ed" killfiled, so I only
see him when somebody quotes him. I could give a fuck what one white
racist thinks about what one black racist said.

How many times do I have to repeat myself before you catch on?
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
FPP
2020-07-01 11:24:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
"Words can carry any burden we wish.  All that's required is agreement
and a tradition upon which to build."  — Frank Herbert, God Emperor
of Dune
You responded to a quote referencing Malcolm X, not Herbert. Looks like this time
it took you all of 10 minutes to contradict your own made-up Usenet rules.
No, I responded to the Herbert quote WITH another Herbert quote.
I responded through your post because I have "Ed" killfiled, so I only
see him when somebody quotes him.
And, before I get asked... I killfiled "Ed" because after the umpteenth
time he kept pushing the narrative that Philando Castile 'pulled a gun'
on a cop, and deserved what he got - I'd fucking had enough.

There was never any evidence that Castile ever had the gun out. It
actually FELL out of his pocket when he was being loaded into the EMT
van, I believe... but "Ed" just wouldn't leave it alone.
Post by FPP
Ed Stasiak Jul 11, 2016, 9:37:49 AM
It suggests he’s a dumbass who can’t even figure out how to drive within
the law, implying that he’s a poor choice to recieve a concealed pistol
license and may do something stupid, like yank out his gat in the middle
of a traffic stop.
-----
Ed Stasiak Jul 11, 2016, 12:07:43 PM
Because if Castile yanked out his pistol like a dumbass, which the cops
claim and pics seem to confirm, which I find far more likely then the cop
shooting him for no reason at all, he brought it on himself
-----
Ed Stasiak Jul 11, 2016
Sure, and you’re supposed to follow the cops commands, not whip out
your pistol.
-----
Ed Stasiak Jul 11, 2016, 5:16:41 PM
While admittedly blurry, it looks to me like an unholstered handgun
laying on his left thigh, with the muzzle pointed to the left and the
grip in his crotch, partly covered by his left hand.
Which suggests he drew the gun from its holster with his right
hand and dropped it in his lap when he was shot.
-----
Ed Stasiak Jul 11, 2016
I don’t believe in any way that Castile wanted to shoot the cop,
he just stupidly (possibly because he was high?) unholstered
his handgun before the cop asked him to, at which point the
cop stupidly freaked out and mag-dumped on him instead of
screaming; “DON’T MOVE OR I’LL FUCKING SHOOT YOU!”
Both are indications of someone who probably shouldn’t be carrying
a handgun, which was proven (IMO) by Castile stupidly drawing his
handgun
-----
Ed Stasiak Jul 12, 2016, 12:50:22 PM
That was what got him shot.
Unless the cop specifically orders you to hand over the gun, just leave
it in the holster; A road-side traffic stop isn’t the place to be fucking
around with guns.
And this also applies to the cops; ordering the civilian to unholster a
handgun and hand it over (thou there’s no evidence this cop did that)
is stupid and only asking for trouble.
But the cop is also to blame in all this, as he should have been paying
attention to what Castile said and what he was doing and if he had, the
cop could stopped all this before it even got started by simply barking
at him.
I’m sure it was in the holster when he was driving but it appears that
once Castile was stopped, he told the cop he had a CPL and a gun
and then the cop asked for I.D., at which point Castile pulled his gun
even thou the cop hadn’t ordered him to, causing the cop to freak out
and shoot him.
-----
Ed Stasiak Jul 16, 2016, 11:32:47 AM
None, I’d guess and as I mentioned up-thread, I don’t believe in any
way that Castile wanted to shoot this cop, he simply fucked up and
pulled out his handgun to hand it over to the cop (despite not being
asked to do so) and as Blacks are WAY over represented in all
categories of crime, (particularly killing cops) the cop freaked out
and shot him.
Castile fucked up and the cop fucked up but there was nothing
“racist” about this shooting. Shit happens.
-----
Ed Stasiak Jul 16, 2016, 12:19:36 PM
I think it went like this;
Cop automatically edgy when stopping a Black guy.
Black guy automatically nervous being stopped by a White (Hispanic) cop.
Black guy fucks up, pulling out handgun to hand it over.
Cop fucks up, immediately shooting the guy thinking he’ll be shot.
#OnlyBlackLivesMatter instantly scream “racism!”…
-----
Ed Stasiak Jul 16, 2016, 2:29:40 PM
But maybe the cop was overly relaxed due to the presence
of Castile's girlfriend and her daughter and wasn’t paying
attention to Castile like he should have, then looked down
and saw the guy suddenly had a gun in his hand?
Asked for his I.D. and instead, the guy pulled a gun out.
Pro-gunners about all about common sense gun safety and
whipping out a gat at a traffic stop, isn’t.
Castile's gun fell out of his pocket as he was being moved by the EMT's.
He never pulled it out, as "Ed" kept saying.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-philando-castile-officer-trial-20170612-story.html

"Prosecutor Jeff Paulsen highlighted autopsy evidence in his closing
argument, reminding the jury of a bullet wound to what would have been
Castile's trigger finger — and that there was no corresponding bullet
damage nor wounds in the area of Castile's right shorts pocket, where he
carried his gun. He also cited testimony from first responders of
Castile's gun falling out of his pocket as he was loaded onto a backboard."

Enough was enough... but maybe it's time to take "Ed" out of the
penalty box, and see if his eyesight has improved. There's only a few
people who deserved to be killfiled forever, and he isn't even close to
being one of them.
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
Ed Stasiak
2020-07-01 13:27:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by FPP
FPP
And, before I get asked... I killfiled "Ed" because after the umpteenth
time he kept pushing the narrative that Philando Castile 'pulled a gun'
on a cop, and deserved what he got - I'd fucking had enough.
As I said at the time and several times afterward when you tried
to misrepresent this discussion, (as you’re doing again) we were
all speculating based on initial reports where it wasn’t clear what
had actually happened.
BTR1701
2020-07-01 19:19:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by FPP
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
"Words can carry any burden we wish.  All that's required is agreement
and a tradition upon which to build."  ′ Frank Herbert, God Emperor
of Dune
You responded to a quote referencing Malcolm X, not Herbert. Looks like this time
it took you all of 10 minutes to contradict your own made-up Usenet rules.
No, I responded to the Herbert quote WITH another Herbert quote.
I responded through your post because I have "Ed" killfiled, so I only
see him when somebody quotes him.
And, before I get asked... I killfiled "Ed" because after the umpteenth
time he kept pushing the narrative that Philando Castile 'pulled a gun'
on a cop, and deserved what he got - I'd fucking had enough.
Is that all one has to do to? Shit, if I do the same with Brooks or
Floyd, will you killfile me, too?
Post by FPP
There was never any evidence that Castile ever had the gun out.
Sure there was: Castile pulled a gun on the cop and deserved what he got.

<crosses fingers>

Oh please, oh please, oh please, oh please...
FPP
2020-07-01 23:32:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by FPP
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
"Words can carry any burden we wish.  All that's required is agreement
and a tradition upon which to build."  ⤲ Frank Herbert, God Emperor
of Dune
You responded to a quote referencing Malcolm X, not Herbert. Looks like this time
it took you all of 10 minutes to contradict your own made-up Usenet rules.
No, I responded to the Herbert quote WITH another Herbert quote.
I responded through your post because I have "Ed" killfiled, so I only
see him when somebody quotes him.
And, before I get asked... I killfiled "Ed" because after the umpteenth
time he kept pushing the narrative that Philando Castile 'pulled a gun'
on a cop, and deserved what he got - I'd fucking had enough.
Is that all one has to do to? Shit, if I do the same with Brooks or
Floyd, will you killfile me, too?
Post by FPP
There was never any evidence that Castile ever had the gun out.
Sure there was: Castile pulled a gun on the cop and deserved what he got.
<crosses fingers>
Oh please, oh please, oh please, oh please...
Sorry... I'll always enjoy popping nice fat over-filled hot-air balloons.
You and Rhino are safe... clowns are funny.
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
trotsky
2020-07-01 10:55:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
BTR1701
Post by shawn
Ed Stasiak
I don't believe progressives have really put any logical thought
into the matter, they've effectively become children throwing a
tantrum and demanding both the dissolution of the police along
with gun control simply because that is Leftist dogma.
But they require protection for themselves, as we see with the Marxists
on the Minneapolis city council, who-- even as they dismantle the police
protections for the average citizen-- demand that they themselves be
protected by armed private security. At taxpayer expense, of course.
"Liberal bigots are the ones who trouble me most. I distrust the
extremes. Scratch a conservative and you find someone who prefers
the past over any future. Scratch a liberal and find a closet
aristocrat."
— Frank Herbert —
"That white person that you see calling himself a liberal is the most
dangerous thing in the entire Western Hemisphere." --Malcolm X
Sure... and we all know how Herbert felt about words...
“Words can carry any burden we wish.  All that’s required is agreement
and a tradition upon which to build.”  ― Frank Herbert, God Emperor of Dune
I liked him better when he wrote under his pseudonym, Herbert Frank.
trotsky
2020-07-01 10:08:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
BTR1701
Post by shawn
Ed Stasiak
I don't believe progressives have really put any logical thought
into the matter, they've effectively become children throwing a
tantrum and demanding both the dissolution of the police along
with gun control simply because that is Leftist dogma.
But they require protection for themselves, as we see with the Marxists
on the Minneapolis city council, who-- even as they dismantle the police
protections for the average citizen-- demand that they themselves be
protected by armed private security. At taxpayer expense, of course.
"Liberal bigots are the ones who trouble me most. I distrust the
extremes. Scratch a conservative and you find someone who prefers
the past over any future. Scratch a liberal and find a closet
aristocrat."
— Frank Herbert —
"That white person that you see calling himself a liberal is the most
dangerous thing in the entire Western Hemisphere." --Malcolm X
I had no idea you were a proponent of Malcolm X! In fact I know you
aren't and this just came up in the propaganda section of your Breitbart
bullshit.

On a related note, which are the real good Golden Girls episodes we
should be looking out for?
FPP
2020-06-30 19:27:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rhino
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50058809473_bed791e2cb_c.jpg
https://www.stevegruber.com/2020/06/armed-protestors-confront-motorcyclist-in-michigan-while-police-watch-and-do-nothing/?utm_medium=ppt&utm_source=pushnotification
(note: the video of the incident has been scrubbed from YouTube…)
There's a saying among police officers that correctly observes that
"when trouble is only seconds away, the police are minutes away".
Well, if you're black in the USA, you can change that to: "when trouble
is only seconds away, a beating is only minutes away"
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
BTR1701
2020-06-30 19:41:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say "that's enough
gun control", the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can't simply order it to
happen, doesn't change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the "defund the police!" insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50058809473_bed791e2cb_c.jpg
(note: the video of the incident has been scrubbed from YouTube
)
There's a saying among police officers that correctly observes that
"when trouble is only seconds away, the police are minutes away". That's
inevitable in a world where it's not practical to put a police officer,
let alone a police station, on every corner.
I think the "progressives" have decided that this is far too much
protection for citizens. They are trying to change the narrative so that
the reality becomes: "Don't even BOTHER to try resisting the mob: we've
abolished the police so no one is coming to help EVER." The best way
they can achieve THAT is to "defund" the police, coupled with taking
away privately-owned guns. But the privately-owned guns aren't even the
major factor in the equation. How long can a private home-owner hold out
if the police are simply never going to come?
It's one thing if you can count on the police to be there in a few
minutes. You can probably hold off a few bad guys for a few minutes with
a handgun, shotgun or rifle and a magazine or two of ammo. But how many
weapons and how much ammo would you need to hold off bad guys INDEFINITELY?
Anyone who is watching these developments and not buying guns and lots
of ammo isn't paying attention.
FPP
2020-06-30 20:29:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say "that's enough
gun control", the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can't simply order it to
happen, doesn't change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the "defund the police!" insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50058809473_bed791e2cb_c.jpg
(note: the video of the incident has been scrubbed from YouTube…)
There's a saying among police officers that correctly observes that
"when trouble is only seconds away, the police are minutes away". That's
inevitable in a world where it's not practical to put a police officer,
let alone a police station, on every corner.
I think the "progressives" have decided that this is far too much
protection for citizens. They are trying to change the narrative so that
the reality becomes: "Don't even BOTHER to try resisting the mob: we've
abolished the police so no one is coming to help EVER." The best way
they can achieve THAT is to "defund" the police, coupled with taking
away privately-owned guns. But the privately-owned guns aren't even the
major factor in the equation. How long can a private home-owner hold out
if the police are simply never going to come?
It's one thing if you can count on the police to be there in a few
minutes. You can probably hold off a few bad guys for a few minutes with
a handgun, shotgun or rifle and a magazine or two of ammo. But how many
weapons and how much ammo would you need to hold off bad guys INDEFINITELY?
Anyone who is watching these developments and not buying guns and lots
of ammo isn't paying attention.
And bombs. Gotta have bombs. Pipe bombs. Hand grenades.
Sharp pointy sticks, too!

Counselor Thanny... always good for a laugh!
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
shawn
2020-06-30 15:40:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:19:49 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
I get that we are coming at it from different perspectives but I see
nothing in the joebiden link that suggests they want to get rid of all
guns. Nothing in there suggests anything but an attempt to try and
prevent the next mass shooting. (Whether the changes would be
effective at doing that is another matter.)
Ed Stasiak
2020-06-30 15:55:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
shawn
Post by shawn
Ed Stasiak
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
I get that we are coming at it from different perspectives but I see
nothing in the joebiden link that suggests they want to get rid of all
guns. Nothing in there suggests anything but an attempt to try and
prevent the next mass shooting. (Whether the changes would be
effective at doing that is another matter.)
Of course Biden isn’t going to officially have a platform policy of simply
banning guns but plenty of Dems have flat-out said that and that has
always been the ultimate goal of anti-gun fundies.

Loading Image...

It’s a process of hacking away at existing civil rights bit by bit until they
can straight-up ban civilian gun ownership, this has been the policy of
the Dems since the 1960s and its only due to continual resistance by
gun owners, the NRA and Reps that this hasn’t happened yet.
anim8rfsk
2020-06-30 17:11:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:19:49 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
I get that we are coming at it from different perspectives but I see
nothing in the joebiden link that suggests they want to get rid of all
guns. Nothing in there suggests anything but an attempt to try and
prevent the next mass shooting. (Whether the changes would be
effective at doing that is another matter.)
I know lots of people that want to get rid of all guns. They don't want the
cops to have 'em either.
--
Join your old RAT friends at
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1688985234647266/
shawn
2020-06-30 17:26:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:19:49 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
I get that we are coming at it from different perspectives but I see
nothing in the joebiden link that suggests they want to get rid of all
guns. Nothing in there suggests anything but an attempt to try and
prevent the next mass shooting. (Whether the changes would be
effective at doing that is another matter.)
I know lots of people that want to get rid of all guns. They don't want the
cops to have 'em either.
Sure, but that's a different argument. One that has a number of
examples that can be pointed to but it's not something that I hear
getting much traction.
The Horny Goat
2020-07-01 15:55:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:19:49 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
I know lots of people that want to get rid of all guns. They don't want the
cops to have 'em either.
So presumably such people would arm police with broadswords or clubs.

We had a case in our area where a man was fatally tasered (5 times in
30 seconds which caused cardiac arrest) by the RCMP and I asked a city
councillor (who was a retired officer) how this would have been
handled pre-taser. He said that a team of 10-12 officers all with
clubs would have been summoned and the man beaten down "...he may have
had his arm broken or lost a couple of teeth - but he'd be alive"

Like Floyd the victim in this case was 6'5" 240 lbs or so.
EGK
2020-07-01 16:34:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by The Horny Goat
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:19:49 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
I know lots of people that want to get rid of all guns. They don't want the
cops to have 'em either.
So presumably such people would arm police with broadswords or clubs.
We had a case in our area where a man was fatally tasered (5 times in
30 seconds which caused cardiac arrest) by the RCMP and I asked a city
councillor (who was a retired officer) how this would have been
handled pre-taser. He said that a team of 10-12 officers all with
clubs would have been summoned and the man beaten down "...he may have
had his arm broken or lost a couple of teeth - but he'd be alive"
Like Floyd the victim in this case was 6'5" 240 lbs or so.
You don't really know they'd be alive. Putting a beating on someone can
kill as easily as a taser. Especially if someone goes too far. You never
know how someone is going to react to a blow to the head for instance.
The Horny Goat
2020-07-03 05:06:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by EGK
Post by The Horny Goat
We had a case in our area where a man was fatally tasered (5 times in
30 seconds which caused cardiac arrest) by the RCMP and I asked a city
councillor (who was a retired officer) how this would have been
handled pre-taser. He said that a team of 10-12 officers all with
clubs would have been summoned and the man beaten down "...he may have
had his arm broken or lost a couple of teeth - but he'd be alive"
Like Floyd the victim in this case was 6'5" 240 lbs or so.
You don't really know they'd be alive. Putting a beating on someone can
kill as easily as a taser. Especially if someone goes too far. You never
know how someone is going to react to a blow to the head for instance.
You're right but surely it's more survivable than being tasered 5
times in 30 seconds!
FPP
2020-07-01 23:34:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by The Horny Goat
Post by anim8rfsk
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:19:49 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
I know lots of people that want to get rid of all guns. They don't want the
cops to have 'em either.
So presumably such people would arm police with broadswords or clubs.
We had a case in our area where a man was fatally tasered (5 times in
30 seconds which caused cardiac arrest) by the RCMP and I asked a city
councillor (who was a retired officer) how this would have been
handled pre-taser. He said that a team of 10-12 officers all with
clubs would have been summoned and the man beaten down "...he may have
had his arm broken or lost a couple of teeth - but he'd be alive"
Like Floyd the victim in this case was 6'5" 240 lbs or so.
I know lots of people that would like to eat ice cream and pizza every
day. I just don't take them seriously... so why would YOU take those
people seriously?

And Donnie Trump was one of those people. He wanted to take the guns,
without any due process - yet the 2nd Amendment loving conservatives
don't say peep...
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
BTR1701
2020-06-30 19:37:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:19:49 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
I get that we are coming at it from different perspectives but I see
nothing in the joebiden link that suggests they want to get rid of all
guns.
Does the New York Times count?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens-repeal-secon
d-amendment.html
FPP
2020-06-30 20:34:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
shawn
2020-06-30 20:50:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:19:49 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the “defund the police!” insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
I get that we are coming at it from different perspectives but I see
nothing in the joebiden link that suggests they want to get rid of all
guns.
Does the New York Times count?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens-repeal-secon
d-amendment.html
If you can show me where Joe Biden (the subject of our conversation)
is advocating the same thing I'll say that counts. I'm sure if I
looked I could find someone advocating for private ownership of
nuclear weapons but that doesn't mean it's a good idea. I'm more
concerned with what our potential leaders are advocating.
BTR1701
2020-06-30 22:09:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:19:49 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say "that's enough
gun control", the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can't simply order it to
happen, doesn't change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the "defund the police!" insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
I get that we are coming at it from different perspectives but I see
nothing in the joebiden link that suggests they want to get rid of all
guns.
Does the New York Times count?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens-repeal-secon
d-amendment.html
If you can show me where Joe Biden (the subject of our conversation)
is advocating the same thing I'll say that counts.
I didn't claim Joe Biden was saying it. My post said "Have you noticed
the recent talking points surfacing on social media and with the talking
heads on leftist-sympathetic TV outlets...
FPP
2020-07-01 06:37:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:19:49 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say "that's enough
gun control", the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can't simply order it to
happen, doesn't change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the "defund the police!" insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
I get that we are coming at it from different perspectives but I see
nothing in the joebiden link that suggests they want to get rid of all
guns.
Does the New York Times count?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens-repeal-secon
d-amendment.html
If you can show me where Joe Biden (the subject of our conversation)
is advocating the same thing I'll say that counts.
I didn't claim Joe Biden was saying it. My post said "Have you noticed
the recent talking points surfacing on social media and with the talking
heads on leftist-sympathetic TV outlets...
I get that we are coming at it from different perspectives but I see
nothing in the joebiden link that suggests they want to get rid of all
guns.
Does the New York Times count?
And then you posted a link. So you responded to a question about Biden
with a link to the Stevens article.
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
BTR1701
2020-07-01 06:56:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:19:49 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or
magazine capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid
of guns, full stop, mass confiscation, in order to reform
the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say "that's
enough gun control", the goal always has been and continues to be
a complete ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can't
simply order it to happen, doesn't change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the "defund the police!" insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
I get that we are coming at it from different perspectives but I see
nothing in the joebiden link that suggests they want to get rid of all
guns.
Does the New York Times count?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens-repeal-secon
d-amendment.html
If you can show me where Joe Biden (the subject of our conversation)
is advocating the same thing I'll say that counts.
I didn't claim Joe Biden was saying it. My post said "Have you noticed
the recent talking points surfacing on social media and with the talking
heads on leftist-sympathetic TV outlets...
Says the guy who routinely responds to posts in one thread with
responses that pertain to a whole other thread.
FPP
2020-07-01 10:42:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:19:49 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or
magazine capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid
of guns, full stop, mass confiscation, in order to reform
the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say "that's
enough gun control", the goal always has been and continues to be
a complete ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can't
simply order it to happen, doesn't change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the "defund the police!" insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
I get that we are coming at it from different perspectives but I see
nothing in the joebiden link that suggests they want to get rid of all
guns.
Does the New York Times count?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens-repeal-secon
d-amendment.html
If you can show me where Joe Biden (the subject of our conversation)
is advocating the same thing I'll say that counts.
I didn't claim Joe Biden was saying it. My post said "Have you noticed
the recent talking points surfacing on social media and with the talking
heads on leftist-sympathetic TV outlets...
Says the guy who routinely responds to posts in one thread with
responses that pertain to a whole other thread.
Welcome to Usenet... you'll catch on someday.
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
trotsky
2020-07-01 11:46:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Says the guy who routinely responds to posts in one thread with
responses that pertain to a whole other thread.
Welcome to Usenet... you'll catch on someday.
He's been trying for two decades.
trotsky
2020-07-01 10:09:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 07:19:49 -0700 (PDT), Ed Stasiak
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say "that's enough
gun control", the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can't simply order it to
happen, doesn't change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
Combine the above policy with the "defund the police!" insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
I get that we are coming at it from different perspectives but I see
nothing in the joebiden link that suggests they want to get rid of all
guns.
Does the New York Times count?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens-repeal-secon
d-amendment.html
If you can show me where Joe Biden (the subject of our conversation)
is advocating the same thing I'll say that counts.
I didn't claim Joe Biden was saying it. My post said "Have you noticed
the recent talking points surfacing on social media and with the talking
heads on leftist-sympathetic TV outlets...
File under: who gives a fuck.
BTR1701
2020-06-30 19:35:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
shawn
BTR1701
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening.
There is no point where the anti-gun fundies will ever say “that’s enough
gun control”, the goal always has been and continues to be a complete
ban on civilian gun ownership and that the Dems can’t simply order it to
happen, doesn’t change that fact.
https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
"The Biden Administration will restore these records, and enact
legislation to make clear that people facing arrest warrants are
prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms."

There are thousands of people out there who don't even know they have a
warrant for their arrest pending. All this does is give the cops the
ability to slap a federal felony on someone who has an arrest warrant
for failure to pay a traffic ticket on time. Say you pay the ticket, the
post office loses the envelope, your payment never arrives, a bench
warrant is issued and nothing happens until months later when the cops
have time to serve it. You never even know there's a warrant until they
show up at your home to arrest you, at which point they notice a rifle
on a rack on the wall. Now you've a got a federal weapons charge against
you and you're headed to the penitentiary for five to ten years for a
traffic ticket and a postal error.
Combine the above policy with the "defund the police!" insanity and
Americans will be left defenseless.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50058809473_bed791e2cb_c.jpg
(note: the video of the incident has been scrubbed from YouTube
)
Of course it has. Can't show BLM misbehaving in any way. That doesn't
fit the narrative.
FPP
2020-06-30 20:37:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
BTR1701
2020-06-30 19:25:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by Rhino
Rhino
Apparently, police retirements are WAY up this year over last
The "defund the police!" policy ought to dovetail nicely with the Dem's
"ban guns!" platform...
Have you noticed the recent talking points surfacing on social media and
with the talking heads on leftist-sympathetic TV outlets that "We can't
have meaningful police reform until we get rid of gun ownership because
one of the main reasons cops feel the need to be militaristic and react
with force so quickly is their worry about people being armed."
They're not even limiting themselves to "assault rifles" or magazine
capacities or whatever anymore. It's just get rid of guns, full stop,
mass confiscation, in order to reform the police.
I'm sorry but no, I haven't notice it because it isn't happening. At
least not in the way you are suggesting because I've been doing a lot
of watching of the media the last few weeks and it's mostly liberal
oriented and that subject just isn't coming up. Sure you'll get the
occasional crazy idea but it's not a subject that's catching fire
unlike everything else that's going on. So I'm sure you can point to
some examples but it won't be anything like the wave that you seem to
be suggesting so it's another one of those things that we hear about
and then it gets dropped because there really wasn't a ground swell of
support for the idea.
Post by BTR1701
Post by Ed Stasiak
272 uniformed NYPD cops file for retirement after George Floyd death
I hope that covers the cops that abuse their position. Without
cleaning house of those sorts of cops nothing is going to change.
Post by BTR1701
Post by Ed Stasiak
Cops are hanging up their handcuffs in huge numbers.
The flurry of Finest farewells began after the police-involved killing
of George Floyd on May 25, with 272 uniformed cops putting in
retirement papers from then through June 24, the NYPD says.
That’s a 49% spike from the 183 officers who filed during the same
period last year, according to the department.
An NYPD source suggested the recent departures could signal a coming
crisis for the 36,000-member department, which also faces a $1 billion
budget reduction amid the "defund the police" furor.
Police Benevolent Association president Patrick Lynch said cops are "at
their breaking point, whether they have 20 years on the job or only
two. We are all asking the same question: 'How can we keep doing our
job in this environment?'
The girlfriend is a LAPD Robbery-Homicide detective and she was planning
on staying on the job another 10 years at least. She's now actively
looking into her early retirement options and a new line of work. In her
opinion, there's no upside to working in an environment where you can be
acting completely within both policy and the law and still end up
charged with murder because the politicians are scared of protesters.
She says the message from city hall and the chief's floor these days is
basically "You all are on your own." No support whatsoever.
Thing is, she's of Colombian descent, so she's a 'diversity' poster-girl
for the department. A latina female working the elite RHD squad is a PC
win for the department so she told me they're having a mild freakout
over her leaving and possibly talking to the wrong people (media) about
how bad it's gotten. They're offering her all sorts of incentives to
stay.
Early retirement is always a great deal as you end up getting paid and
yet be free to do whatever you want with your time. Including finding
yet another job and earning an extra paycheck. So it's little surprise
anyone that has the option doesn't at least consider it when the
environment gets a bit tough.
Yeah, being charged with murder for following policy and the law is a
'bit tough'. Sure.
shawn
2020-06-30 19:44:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Rhino
Early retirement is always a great deal as you end up getting paid and
yet be free to do whatever you want with your time. Including finding
yet another job and earning an extra paycheck. So it's little surprise
anyone that has the option doesn't at least consider it when the
environment gets a bit tough.
Yeah, being charged with murder for following policy and the law is a
'bit tough'. Sure.
Are you defending Chauvin? Wow...

That's the only case I can think of where this comes in to play unless
you mean the Breonna Taylor case but that's another case where it's
hard to defend the cops given that they shot and killed an EMT in her
sleep. Or is there some other case you are thinking of?

I don't know of cops doing the right thing getting charged with murder
but you are welcome to show me the examples.
BTR1701
2020-06-30 20:22:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Rhino
Early retirement is always a great deal as you end up getting paid and
yet be free to do whatever you want with your time. Including finding
yet another job and earning an extra paycheck. So it's little surprise
anyone that has the option doesn't at least consider it when the
environment gets a bit tough.
Yeah, being charged with murder for following policy and the law is a
'bit tough'. Sure.
Are you defending Chauvin?
No, because his actions were out of both policy and the law.
FPP
2020-06-30 20:42:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Rhino
Early retirement is always a great deal as you end up getting paid and
yet be free to do whatever you want with your time. Including finding
yet another job and earning an extra paycheck. So it's little surprise
anyone that has the option doesn't at least consider it when the
environment gets a bit tough.
Yeah, being charged with murder for following policy and the law is a
'bit tough'. Sure.
Are you defending Chauvin?
No, because his actions were out of both policy and the law.
Plus Chauvin needs a real lawyer...
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
Rhino
2020-07-01 01:30:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Rhino
Early retirement is always a great deal as you end up getting paid and
yet be free to do whatever you want with your time. Including finding
yet another job and earning an extra paycheck. So it's little surprise
anyone that has the option doesn't at least consider it when the
environment gets a bit tough.
Yeah, being charged with murder for following policy and the law is a
'bit tough'. Sure.
Are you defending Chauvin? Wow...
That's the only case I can think of where this comes in to play unless
you mean the Breonna Taylor case but that's another case where it's
hard to defend the cops given that they shot and killed an EMT in her
sleep. Or is there some other case you are thinking of?
I don't know of cops doing the right thing getting charged with murder
but you are welcome to show me the examples.
Tens of thousands of "mostly peaceful" protestors would happily hang
Chauvin right now - and possibly the other three officers - just on the
belief that he'd done wrong, without even hearing any of the evidence.

It's like the old Westerns where a lynch mob gathers and demands that
the sheriff hand his prisoner over so they can hang him. They seethe in
anger when the sheriff says he hasn't been tried in court yet and insist
"We KNOW he did it, we don't need no stinkin' trial!"

Chauvin and the other officers deserve their days in court and lawyers
to defend them, just like everyone else. And if the jury finds against
them, they deserve whatever sentence gets applied. But you and I have NO
SAY in what happens unless we happen to wind up on the jury.
--
Rhino
BTR1701
2020-07-01 03:45:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Rhino
Early retirement is always a great deal as you end up getting paid and
yet be free to do whatever you want with your time. Including finding
yet another job and earning an extra paycheck. So it's little surprise
anyone that has the option doesn't at least consider it when the
environment gets a bit tough.
Yeah, being charged with murder for following policy and the law is a
'bit tough'. Sure.
Are you defending Chauvin? Wow...
That's the only case I can think of where this comes in to play unless
you mean the Breonna Taylor case but that's another case where it's
hard to defend the cops given that they shot and killed an EMT in her
sleep. Or is there some other case you are thinking of?
I don't know of cops doing the right thing getting charged with murder
but you are welcome to show me the examples.
The 'right thing' is a matter of personal opinion and often not in line
with the facts or the law.

However, even the Atlanta mayor acknowledged that the actions of the cop
who shot Rayshard Brooks were arguably within policy and law, but that
he should be charged with murder anyway:

"While there may be debate as to whether this was an appropriate use of
deadly force, I firmly believe that there is a distinction between what
you can do and what you should do," Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance-Bottoms
Bottoms said.

And that's what my girlfriend was talking about when she said she sees
no future in doing a job she loves. When the city leaders-- who have the
same attitude and fear of the woke mob as the Atlanta mayor-- are
basically saying that it doesn't matter if you do everything right, if
we (and the mob) don't like the outcome, we're gonna throw you under the
bus, then there's no point in putting yourself in such an untenable
position.
Post by Rhino
Tens of thousands of "mostly peaceful" protestors
Don't you just love that phrase? There was another shooting death in
CHAZ this weekend, yet the leftist media still keep describing it as
'mostly peaceful'. How many people have to literally be shot to death
before it's no longer 'mostly peaceful' to these leftist lickspittles
who call themselves journalists.

If a leftist protester was shot outside a Trump rally or back in the
day, a Tea Party march resulted in 3 people being shot, do you even
think for a second the media would describe those events as a "mostly
peaceful protest" or a "mostly peaceful" rally?
Rhino
2020-07-01 04:19:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Rhino
Early retirement is always a great deal as you end up getting paid and
yet be free to do whatever you want with your time. Including finding
yet another job and earning an extra paycheck. So it's little surprise
anyone that has the option doesn't at least consider it when the
environment gets a bit tough.
Yeah, being charged with murder for following policy and the law is a
'bit tough'. Sure.
Are you defending Chauvin? Wow...
That's the only case I can think of where this comes in to play unless
you mean the Breonna Taylor case but that's another case where it's
hard to defend the cops given that they shot and killed an EMT in her
sleep. Or is there some other case you are thinking of?
I don't know of cops doing the right thing getting charged with murder
but you are welcome to show me the examples.
The 'right thing' is a matter of personal opinion and often not in line
with the facts or the law.
However, even the Atlanta mayor acknowledged that the actions of the cop
who shot Rayshard Brooks were arguably within policy and law, but that
"While there may be debate as to whether this was an appropriate use of
deadly force, I firmly believe that there is a distinction between what
you can do and what you should do," Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance-Bottoms
Bottoms said.
And that's what my girlfriend was talking about when she said she sees
no future in doing a job she loves. When the city leaders-- who have the
same attitude and fear of the woke mob as the Atlanta mayor-- are
basically saying that it doesn't matter if you do everything right, if
we (and the mob) don't like the outcome, we're gonna throw you under the
bus, then there's no point in putting yourself in such an untenable
position.
Not a lot of people would keep working under those circumstances and the
ones that stayed are more likely to be the ones who were just looking
for a pay cheque and who didn't care as much about what they did as long
as it curried favour with the bosses and helped their careers.
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
Tens of thousands of "mostly peaceful" protestors
Don't you just love that phrase? There was another shooting death in
CHAZ this weekend, yet the leftist media still keep describing it as
'mostly peaceful'. How many people have to literally be shot to death
before it's no longer 'mostly peaceful' to these leftist lickspittles
who call themselves journalists.
If a leftist protester was shot outside a Trump rally or back in the
day, a Tea Party march resulted in 3 people being shot, do you even
think for a second the media would describe those events as a "mostly
peaceful protest" or a "mostly peaceful" rally?
Not a chance! It would be decried as a "white supremacist" incident and
very likely as an "all too typical white supremacist" incident. But
knowing their proclivity for exaggeration, it would more likely be "yet
another white supremacist bloodbath" or even "alt-right terrorism" no
matter how much the victims had provoked the attack. For instance, the
usual suspects were outraged by the police car that sped up when umpteen
"mostly peacefuls" had broken the rear window of the SUV and were
literally bouncing up and down on the roof as it drove. They carried on
as if actions like that weren't immediately and overtly hostile and
threatening and they were the most innocent of victims. As the old
saying goes, if you mess with the bull, sometimes you get the horns.
--
Rhino
FPP
2020-07-01 06:40:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Rhino
Early retirement is always a great deal as you end up getting paid and
yet be free to do whatever you want with your time. Including finding
yet another job and earning an extra paycheck. So it's little surprise
anyone that has the option doesn't at least consider it when the
environment gets a bit tough.
Yeah, being charged with murder for following policy and the law is a
'bit tough'. Sure.
Are you defending Chauvin? Wow...
That's the only case I can think of where this comes in to play unless
you mean the Breonna Taylor case but that's another case where it's
hard to defend the cops given that they shot and killed an EMT in her
sleep. Or is there some other case you are thinking of?
I don't know of cops doing the right thing getting charged with murder
but you are welcome to show me the examples.
The 'right thing' is a matter of personal opinion and often not in line
with the facts or the law.
However, even the Atlanta mayor acknowledged that the actions of the cop
who shot Rayshard Brooks were arguably within policy and law, but that
Love to see the policy or law that allows a cop to viciously kick a man
(on the ground) he just shot as he's dying.

Please... show me that one!
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
trotsky
2020-07-01 11:02:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Rhino
Early retirement is always a great deal as you end up getting paid and
yet be free to do whatever you want with your time. Including finding
yet another job and earning an extra paycheck. So it's little surprise
anyone that has the option doesn't at least consider it when the
environment gets a bit tough.
Yeah, being charged with murder for following policy and the law is a
'bit tough'. Sure.
Are you defending Chauvin? Wow...
That's the only case I can think of where this comes in to play unless
you mean the Breonna Taylor case but that's another case where it's
hard to defend the cops given that they shot and killed an EMT in her
sleep. Or is there some other case you are thinking of?
I don't know of cops doing the right thing getting charged with murder
but you are welcome to show me the examples.
The 'right thing' is a matter of personal opinion and often not in line
with the facts or the law.
However, even the Atlanta mayor acknowledged that the actions of the cop
who shot Rayshard Brooks were arguably within policy and law, but that
Love to see the policy or law that allows a cop to viciously kick a man
(on the ground) he just shot as he's dying.
Please... show me that one!
Don't leave out the new kid on the block: inappropriate photos at the
death scene.
FPP
2020-07-01 11:30:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by trotsky
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Rhino
Early retirement is always a great deal as you end up getting paid and
yet be free to do whatever you want with your time. Including finding
yet another job and earning an extra paycheck. So it's little surprise
anyone that has the option doesn't at least consider it when the
environment gets a bit tough.
Yeah, being charged with murder for following policy and the law is a
'bit tough'. Sure.
Are you defending Chauvin? Wow...
That's the only case I can think of where this comes in to play unless
you mean the Breonna Taylor case but that's another case where it's
hard to defend the cops given that they shot and killed an EMT in her
sleep. Or is there some other case you are thinking of?
I don't know of cops doing the right thing getting charged with murder
but you are welcome to show me the examples.
The 'right thing' is a matter of personal opinion and often not in line
with the facts or the law.
However, even the Atlanta mayor acknowledged that the actions of the cop
who shot Rayshard Brooks were arguably within policy and law, but that
Love to see the policy or law that allows a cop to viciously kick a
man (on the ground) he just shot as he's dying.
Please... show me that one!
Don't leave out the new kid on the block: inappropriate photos at the
death scene.
I kind of doubt we'll be hearing back from Deputy Thanny about 'policy
or law' that lets a cop kick a guy after he's been shot and bleeding to
death on the ground... and then didn't give him any medical help for
another 2 minutes.
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
trotsky
2020-07-01 12:00:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by FPP
Post by trotsky
Post by FPP
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
Post by BTR1701
Post by shawn
In
Rhino
Early retirement is always a great deal as you end up getting paid and
yet be free to do whatever you want with your time. Including finding
yet another job and earning an extra paycheck. So it's little surprise
anyone that has the option doesn't at least consider it when the
environment gets a bit tough.
Yeah, being charged with murder for following policy and the law is a
'bit tough'. Sure.
Are you defending Chauvin? Wow...
That's the only case I can think of where this comes in to play unless
you mean the Breonna Taylor case but that's another case where it's
hard to defend the cops given that they shot and killed an EMT in her
sleep. Or is there some other case you are thinking of?
I don't know of cops doing the right thing getting charged with murder
but you are welcome to show me the examples.
The 'right thing' is a matter of personal opinion and often not in line
with the facts or the law.
However, even the Atlanta mayor acknowledged that the actions of the cop
who shot Rayshard Brooks were arguably within policy and law, but that
Love to see the policy or law that allows a cop to viciously kick a
man (on the ground) he just shot as he's dying.
Please... show me that one!
Don't leave out the new kid on the block: inappropriate photos at the
death scene.
I kind of doubt we'll be hearing back from Deputy Thanny about 'policy
or law' that lets a cop kick a guy after he's been shot and bleeding to
death on the ground... and then didn't give him any medical help for
another 2 minutes.
Who the fuck knew when Johnny Cash sang "I shot a man in Reno just to
watch him die" the cops of this country would take this a life lesson?
The Horny Goat
2020-07-01 15:49:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by shawn
Early retirement is always a great deal as you end up getting paid and
yet be free to do whatever you want with your time. Including finding
yet another job and earning an extra paycheck. So it's little surprise
anyone that has the option doesn't at least consider it when the
environment gets a bit tough.
My wife had two relatives who both earned two pensions.

One was a career air force officer who retired as a Lt Colonel and
after that did 10 years as a manager in the Saskatchewan prison
system.

The other was a high school principal who became a federal member o f
parliament (you Americans think 'Congressman in Washington').

Guess which one I had enormous respect for and which I didn't?

(On top of which his wife had had an embolism and he had had to pony
up for nursing home care as she spent the last 12 years of her life in
a coma - it happened when he was serving in a remote air force base in
northern Quebec. I don't believe he ever re-married. While he was
never in combat he was posted to several 'hot spots' that could have
had him in harms' way at the drop of a hat.

After his retirement from the air force, my wife remembers him being a
guest at their home when the doorbell rang and her father greeted a
very young officer asking if Col. so and so was there and when told
yes asked if there was a room where they could speak privately. My
father-in-law took the officer into his living room, closed the door
then summoned his brother. He told them afterwards that he had
received sealed orders - this was during the 1973 Arab-Israeli war
after Defcon 3 had been declared and 25 years later told my wife where
he was to be mobilized to go - though as you likely know NATO troops
were not actually mobilized in 1973 and these orders were a 48 hour
alert advising reserve officers to hold themselves ready)
trotsky
2020-06-30 13:33:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by Rhino
Rhino
Apparently, police retirements are WAY up this year over last
The "defund the police!" policy ought to dovetail nicely with the Dem's
"ban guns!" platform...
Have you noticed the recent talking points surfacing on social media and
with the talking heads on leftist-sympathetic TV outlets that "We can't
have meaningful police reform until we get rid of gun ownership because
one of the main reasons cops feel the need to be militaristic and react
with force so quickly is their worry about people being armed."
a) is that a question? and b) which G Girls ep was that in?
FPP
2020-06-30 19:31:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by trotsky
Post by BTR1701
Post by Ed Stasiak
Post by Rhino
Rhino
Apparently, police retirements are WAY up this year over last
The "defund the police!" policy ought to dovetail nicely with the Dem's
"ban guns!" platform...
Have you noticed the recent talking points surfacing on social media and
with the talking heads on leftist-sympathetic TV outlets that "We can't
have meaningful police reform until we get rid of gun ownership because
one of the main reasons cops feel the need to be militaristic and react
with force so quickly is their worry about people being armed."
a) is that a question? and b) which G Girls ep was that in?
Is the fuckwit still pretending that it wasn't President Bumblefuck who
wanted to take his guns away WITHOUT due process?

"Trump says take guns first and worry about 'due process second' in
White House gun meeting."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/02/28/trump-says-take-guns-first-and-worry-due-process-second-white-house-gun-meeting/381145002/

Why doesn't Thanny EVER respond to that when I bring it up? Surely it's
not because he's a fucking hypocrite? I mean, his president came right
out and SAID it!
--
Nuts that spent the last twenty years prepping their bunker to survive
indefinitely in a nuclear winter are giving up after wearing a thin
cloth mask for three weeks. LOL -Matt Haughey

"Leaders who have hidden in a bunker and gassed their own citizens
include Saddam Hussein, Adolf Hitler and Donald [Bunker Bitch] Trump." -
Ben Wexler
REAL PRESIDENTS LEAD. REALITY TV PRESIDENTS DON'T.

Trump: "No, I don't take responsibility at all." - 3/13/20
Rhino
2020-06-29 21:05:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
You might be interested in seeing this video of Rebel News trying to do
reporting from City Hall in Toronto, which is currently occupied by a
combination of aboriginals and blacks with the apparent acquiescence of
Toronto mayor John Tory.
Apparently, it *is* still possible for a reporter to report - provided
he hires seven security guards, brings a lawyer, and happens upon a
reasonable police officer. Otherwise, not so much....
LOL! The people who have illegally taken over a public square do not
have the laws enforced on them, but if someone goes to report on it,
they get ejected by the cops for 'creating a disturbance'.
I liked Ezra Levant's characterization of the City Hall security people
as "mall cops". He's got me wondering what, if any, authority they
actually have about anything. They dress like police, except for the
weapons, and they give orders as if they have authority but I'm not
clear if they have any actual power or just have a police-like uniform
and the tendency of Canadians to do what they're told.
The cop he was talking to near the end was ridiculous. He was like, "You
can go in and do your news report but if one of the unwashed
proto-commies explodes and gets violent, you'll be trespassed and forced
to leave."
Say what the actual fuck now?
He's literally saying that if *they* break the law, he's going to blame
it on the reporter and charge him with a crime? How about if someone
violently explodes, *they* get charged with a crime and get kicked out?
Because, you know, they'll be the ones actually breaking the law.
It's like we're well through the looking glass in this world now.
You might find this short item interesting too; clearly mayor John Tory
is keen to "take a knee" to the mob just like so many American
politicians have:
https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=1986321
--
Rhino
BTR1701
2020-06-30 19:22:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rhino
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rhino
You might be interested in seeing this video of Rebel News trying to do
reporting from City Hall in Toronto, which is currently occupied by a
combination of aboriginals and blacks with the apparent acquiescence of
Toronto mayor John Tory.
Apparently, it *is* still possible for a reporter to report - provided
he hires seven security guards, brings a lawyer, and happens upon a
reasonable police officer. Otherwise, not so much....
LOL! The people who have illegally taken over a public square do not
have the laws enforced on them, but if someone goes to report on it,
they get ejected by the cops for 'creating a disturbance'.
I liked Ezra Levant's characterization of the City Hall security people
as "mall cops". He's got me wondering what, if any, authority they
actually have about anything. They dress like police, except for the
weapons, and they give orders as if they have authority but I'm not
clear if they have any actual power or just have a police-like uniform
and the tendency of Canadians to do what they're told.
The cop he was talking to near the end was ridiculous. He was like, "You
can go in and do your news report but if one of the unwashed
proto-commies explodes and gets violent, you'll be trespassed and forced
to leave."
Say what the actual fuck now?
He's literally saying that if *they* break the law, he's going to blame
it on the reporter and charge him with a crime? How about if someone
violently explodes, *they* get charged with a crime and get kicked out?
Because, you know, they'll be the ones actually breaking the law.
It's like we're well through the looking glass in this world now.
You might find this short item interesting too; clearly mayor John Tory
is keen to "take a knee" to the mob just like so many American
https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=1986321
Yep, they're going full dhimmi as fast as they can.
RichA
2020-06-29 21:01:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rhino
You might be interested in seeing this video of Rebel News trying to do
reporting from City Hall in Toronto, which is currently occupied by a
combination of aboriginals and blacks with the apparent acquiescence of
Toronto mayor John Tory.
https://www.rebelnews.com/showdown_rebel_news_takes_on_antifa_mob_mall_cops_and_politically_correct_police?utm_campaign=el_cityhall_yt_prem_6_29_20&utm_medium=email&utm_source=therebel
Apparently, it *is* still possible for a reporter to report - provided
he hires seven security guards, brings a lawyer, and happens upon a
reasonable police officer. Otherwise, not so much....
--
Rhino
The mayor was elected as a conservative against a rabid socialist bat-eater. But once he got into office, he turned out to be a left-lib. He tried to implement a toll on cars entering the city. That was shot-down by the province. He then did the bidding of every leftist there because he was so desperate to get his bronze-plaque attached to an ill-advised Light Rail System that doesn't even direct-connect to the existing subway system. Meanwhile, his wheedling pronouncements just make you want to punch him in the face.
Adam H. Kerman
2020-06-30 05:07:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rhino
You might be interested in seeing this video of Rebel News trying to do
reporting from City Hall in Toronto, which is currently occupied by a
combination of aboriginals and blacks with the apparent acquiescence of
Toronto mayor John Tory. . . .
I had to laugh when I heard "indigenous" people occupying Nathan
Phillips Square. What, the asshole who faked the racist incident at the
Lincoln Memorial?

He was mayor of Toronto in the 1950s.

Canada has gotten scary of late.
Rhino
2020-06-30 12:49:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Adam H. Kerman
Post by Rhino
You might be interested in seeing this video of Rebel News trying to do
reporting from City Hall in Toronto, which is currently occupied by a
combination of aboriginals and blacks with the apparent acquiescence of
Toronto mayor John Tory. . . .
I had to laugh when I heard "indigenous" people occupying Nathan
Phillips Square. What, the asshole who faked the racist incident at the
Lincoln Memorial?
I have to say I was surprised to find that the name of the "victim" at
the Lincoln Memorial was so familiar.
Post by Adam H. Kerman
He was mayor of Toronto in the 1950s.
Canada has gotten scary of late.
We're farther gone down the "progressive" rabbit hole than you are in
the US, particularly with our current brain-dead virtue signaller
running the asylum.
--
Rhino
Loading...