@shortbus where does your comment about him being a racist come from? I have heard him speak and have read some of his papers and I see nothing racist about him.

 

Hahaha. This is the funniest post I've read all day. Good one.

Then see my reply to wayneh, for another one.

 

Read all of his columns, not just a Wiki probably written by his supporters. He, even though black himself, is really down on other blacks. He also rails against "intellectual elites" pretty regularly, even though he is one himself.

No. You read them. They are right here:

http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/

Please produce one single article written by Mr. Sowell that demonstrates this racism for which you've libelled him. If you cannot, retract your comment and apologize.

 

The way he was killed is interesting and could raise significant issues down the road: supposedly, a robot delivered a bomb and its detonation killed the guy. Now, that's equivalent to a "drone" strike executed routinely overseas, and to my knowledge, this is the first "drone" strike kill on US soil.

I am curious if someone (ACLU?) would raise a due process challenge, particularly if communications to be discovered that showed killing him was the express, or even partial consideration in delivering that bomb.

Lots of constitutional questions here.

 

The way he was killed is interesting and could raise significant issues down the road: supposedly, a robot delivered a bomb and its detonation killed the guy. Now, that's equivalent to a "drone" strike executed routinely overseas, and to my knowledge, this is the first "drone" strike kill on US soil.

I am curious if someone (ACLU?) would raise a due process challenge, particularly if communications to be discovered that showed killing him was the express, or even partial consideration in delivering that bomb.

Lots of constitutional questions here.

In that situation, if they decided to drop a building on his head, I'd have no second thoughts.

 

Human remotely operated bomb or human remotely fired bullet on a ballistic track to the brain bucket, can't see much difference in this case.

 

Human remotely operated bomb or human remotely fired bullet on a ballistic track to the brain bucket, can't see much difference in this case.

The difference is the level of risk at which the person brandishing the weapon is exposed. In this case, the lower the risk, the better.

 

The difference is the level of risk at which the person brandishing the weapon is exposed. In this case, the lower the risk, the better.

If you mean lower risk to the cops trying to stop him then yes. The killer made the choice to die that night and a bomb was too good for the bastard.

 

The way he was killed is interesting and could raise significant issues down the road:

This conversation has already started in other websites.
This particular case is a no-brainer. Will the next police delivered bomb be as clear cut?
SWAT teams already throw grenades into occupied houses with no warning. (In the last year, this practice has maimed a baby, and led to the death of an innocent and wounding of a police officer.)
What's the difference? The size of the bomb?
Whether it was delivered to the wrong address?
Whether it will be delivered into the crib of a baby?

Stay tuned. This conversation is not over.

 

Dropping bombs is old news.

 

Dropping bombs is old news.

Delivering them by remote control is new.
A conspiracy nut might fear that State agents might use any method available to deliver any level of force available.
Fortunately, this never happens in our civilized society. Right?

 

The government will always have bigger guns.

 

This particular case is a no-brainer.

Yes, the robot's rights were blatantly violated...

 

Yes, the robot's rights were blatantly violated...

It was for a good cause.

 

Delivering them by remote control is new.
A conspiracy nut might fear that State agents might use any method available to deliver any level of force available.
Fortunately, this never happens in our civilized society. Right?

As long as the remote control is manipulated by human hands that's fine but when machines decides who dies there can be problems.

 

What? Laws and laws and laws about, "assault rifles" and now you want to ban WW II relics?
Not gonna happen in 'Murica.
People here are having serious doubts about being disarmed by our government.
Try this idea: If 5% of the honest citizens in the Orlando event (or the Paris night club) were packing heat, no maniac would ever load a second magazine of bullets.

Rawlings said investigators' initial confusion about the number of shooters was partly because about 20 protesters wearing protective vests and carrying rifles scattered when the shooting started.
I guess you could say it worked in Dallas. 100 cops and 20 packers.

and then there's this example, "Media Silent as Concealed Carrier Stops Mass Shooting in Progress at a South Carolina Nightclub."
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/concealed-carrier-stops-mass-shooting/

Didn't come out as well for the guy in Minnesota.
It kind of sounds like he would have been better off not telling the cop he had a permit and a gun.

 

Delivering them by remote control is new.
A conspiracy nut might fear that State agents might use any method available to deliver any level of force available.
Fortunately, this never happens in our civilized society. Right?

You mean this one?

 

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2016/0...n/video/playlists/dallas-police-officer-shot/

 

Didn't come out as well for the guy in Minnesota.
It kind of sounds like he would have been better off not telling the cop he had a permit and a gun.

Other than the girlfriend stating such "after the fact", was there any evidence the person said it? Other sources state he wasn't qualified for a CCL.

 

Three ways you can solve this type of issue (in order):

1. Less trigger happy / Less twitchy police
2. Finger racism in the police force / public in general
3. Reduce gun availability

With respect to number 1 ....