Try that shoe on the other foot: "I would not have been outraged if the hundreds of riot equipped police were shot."
Uh...wait...nobody was armed except the riot squads. There was never any possibility of anybody shooting the MRAPs or Missile launchers.

It's hard to shoot your way out if you didn't bring any guns.
How are you doing on shooting unarmed people?
OK as long as a LEO does it?

Stupid question. You just said that.

Not really stupid given that the protest had become well know for violence and physical resistance and worse. ( that whole idiot girl who blew her arm off with a homemade bomb thing if you recall)

https://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2016/11/23/really-injured-sophia-wilansky/

http://kfgo.com/news/articles/2016/...ine-protester-says-law-officer-threw-grenade/

https://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2017/01/05/sophia-wilansky-going-face-charges-pipe-bomb-hurt/

They were not all passive polite peaceful protesters by any means which by standard law enforcement procedure gave them every reason to consider that everyone there that was not picking up their stuff and leaving quietly was or could likely be armed and dangerous in any number of ways.

They burned vehicles and destroyed property that was not theirs, they were proven to have had and used bombs and explosives with the likely intent to use more, They killed animals that were not theirs, and many were known and proven to have had knives and or other such hand held weapons on them as well all while having had multiple incidences of resisting arrest(at times forcefully resisting) all along the whole timeline of the protest.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/da...activists-arrested-tense-clash-police-n674361

My point is there was a whole second far worse side to this protest than what so many want or care to have shown. They were not all a bunch of peace loving native americans and hippies sitting around in grassy field singing protest songs. Many were legitimately dangerous and proved it repeatedly thus justifying the law enforcement to have to respond to everyone every time as if everyone was equally armed and dangerous.

 

( that whole idiot girl who blew her arm off with a homemade bomb thing if you recall)

Yeah, I recall the idiot girl who got injured by a grenade the police brought with them and threw at her.
"authorities say she was hurt by a small propane tank that protesters rigged to explode." and never found the remains of any tank that exploded.
"the officers noticed the protesters approach and roll multiple metallic cylinder objects."
"Law Enforcement received information that protesters were using one-pound propane cylinders"
Why would anybody bend down and roll a one pound propane cylinder?

"Officers simply are not issued any devices consistent with her rather interesting injuries."
Federal charges brought against officer in Baby Bou Bou case
Bounkham “Bou Bou” Phonesavanh, the 19-month-old who sustained severe injuries to his face and chest, along with possible brain damage, after a stun grenade deployed during the May 2014 raid landed in his playpen
http://www.ajc.com/news/crime--law/...cer-baby-bou-bou-case/wGWw3iatVh3cPYOHlTD1HK/

To summarize: We don't have no explosives. That's why an officer is charged in Federal court with using one on a baby.
The grenades we don't have don't hurt nobody. That's why we paid millions to repair the baby we blew up.
If I hit you with a club, that's called, "resisting arrest" and if I hit you with my fist, that's called, "assault on an officer" (s fist)".

They were not all passive polite peaceful protesters

thus justifying the law enforcement to have to respond to everyone every time as if everyone was equally armed and dangerous

Yeah. That's happening all over our country.
In the news today:
Cowardly Cop Mistakes Wallet for a Gun and Shoots Innocent Airman
Davidson’s hands went up and the second shot was fired, which hit Davidson.
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/fear-shooting-cop-wallet-gun/

 

How are you doing on shooting unarmed people?

I don't believe anyone should be allowed to squat on property they don't own. When other reasonable methods to remove them have been exhausted, I'm all for armed action. I don't expect it to become legal and I don't want to see it happen, but the threat should be real. If you camp in my yard without permission, don't expect me to just abide, dude.

 

but the threat should be real.

Threat, threat, threat!
Terrorist, terrorist, terrorist!
Crisis, crisis, crisis!
Bring the MRAPs! Shoot on sight! Fire the missile launchers! Nuke North Korea!

That's why I phone people from the street instead of knocking on their door.
Some people are so wound up over the TV sensationalism to see who's there before shooting.

 

Crisis, crisis, crisis!

I'm patient. No crisis. Let the system work at its frustratingly slow pace. All I'm saying is that I don't mind if the situation is allowed to escalate to a final resolution. That should not come without clear communication of intent, ie. warnings of what is about to happen. I'm not talking about trigger-happy cops here, I'm talking about what to do with squatters that have had months to get the hell out but will not. At some point, lethal force has to be a viable option.

 

"Officers simply are not issued any devices consistent with her rather interesting injuries."
Federal charges brought against officer in Baby Bou Bou case
Bounkham “Bou Bou” Phonesavanh, the 19-month-old who sustained severe injuries to his face and chest, along with possible brain damage, after a stun grenade deployed during the May 2014 raid landed in his playpen
http://www.ajc.com/news/crime--law/...cer-baby-bou-bou-case/wGWw3iatVh3cPYOHlTD1HK/

To summarize: We don't have no explosives. That's why an officer is charged in Federal court with using one on a baby.
The grenades we don't have don't hurt nobody. That's why we paid millions to repair the baby we blew up.
If I hit you with a club, that's called, "resisting arrest" and if I hit you with my fist, that's called, "assault on an officer" (s fist)".

Yeah. That's happening all over our country.
In the news today:
Cowardly Cop Mistakes Wallet for a Gun and Shoots Innocent Airman
Davidson’s hands went up and the second shot was fired, which hit Davidson.
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/fear-shooting-cop-wallet-gun/

Are you high?

How exactly do those incidents from completely different locations and timelines relate to the DAP protesters or the idiot girl who blew her own arm off then tried to blame law enforcement on her own stupidity?

What's the valid rational connection?

 

I don't believe anyone should be allowed to squat on property they don't own. When other reasonable methods to remove them have been exhausted, I'm all for armed action.

Didn't that all ready happen on that land? The Indians lost then too.

 

That should not come without clear communication of intent, ie. warnings of what is about to happen.

You mean like Waco and Ruby Ridge? Why didn't they (cops) do it with Clive Bundy and his gang?

 

I'm patient. No crisis. Let the system work at its frustratingly slow pace. All I'm saying is that I don't mind if the situation is allowed to escalate to a final resolution. That should not come without clear communication of intent, ie. warnings of what is about to happen. I'm not talking about trigger-happy cops here, I'm talking about what to do with squatters that have had months to get the hell out but will not. At some point, lethal force has to be a viable option.

That's largely how I see it as well. I just don't care for how things get spun by the media and changed to falsely imply something happened (racial/ethnic profiling and harassment) for a reason that it did not or to try and push that something didn't happen that clearly did. Especially when there is and has been a load of easily found and confirmable evidence to show everything was and is to the contrary of what's been deliberately misrepresented and fed to the public.

This thread has been a near perfect example.

How many now have already tried and will continue to try to play down the reality of what did happen by trying to redirect the topic from the factual data and truth of the real events that took place and why they did by trying to relate it to totally unrelated and irrelevant other situations and circumstances to justify their excuses so that they don't have to accept that what happened didn't really happen the way the media portrayed it to them?

As of now it sure looks and seems that what did happen is apparently of little no consequence or concern but chasing 'what if' based excuses and misdirections along with trying to relate weak anecdotal events for far off times and locations to it to try and steer the factual relevance of everything that shows that how the media portrayed the whole event to the uninformed public is nowhere close to the reality of what really went on and why are being pushed beyond absurdity to detract from its validity is.

Is finding out the media(once again) lied en masse to the public with a very deliberate bad intent in mind to support an agenda of their own that hard of a pill to swallow for what should be intelenet rational minded people who should know better at their age?

Seems it apparently is and is so way more than I would have guessed.

 

Is finding out the media(once again) lied en masse to the public with a very deliberate bad intent in mind to support an agenda of their own that hard of a pill to swallow for what should be intelenet rational minded people who should know better at their age?

Seems it apparently is and is so way more than I would have guessed.

Only 32% of people believe the Media, and I feel that number will fall. 2015 Gallup pol.

kv

 

You mean like Waco and Ruby Ridge?

I'm pretty sure those are both examples of the government attacking and killing people on their own land. Not really the same.

Why didn't they (cops) do it with Clive Bundy and his gang?

They probably should have. There was a risk of an armed exchange and great pains were taken to avoid it. I'm not sure I would have held back to that degree.

 

Only 32% of people believe the Media, and I feel that number will fall. 2015 Gallup pol.

Yea but they are the 32% that scream the loudest and do their damnedest at all cost to themselves and anyone else they can stick with the bill to keep the lies going.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/195542/americans-trust-mass-media-sinks-new-low.aspx 14% and falling with Republicans.

Who trusts what by the rough numbers. (But they could be lying too. )

http://www.gallup.com/poll/1597/confidence-institutions.aspx

 

They probably should have. There was a risk of an armed exchange and great pains were taken to avoid it. I'm not sure I would have held back to that degree.

A lot of those sorts of examples have a lot more that went on behind the scenes than the media and those involved ever let on. Take the same people form either side and put them up against totally different conditions and other people and they would have completely different results.

Like putting a law enforcement team where they are of above average intelligence and training lead by a calm rational leadership in a situation Vs one of lower intelenet poorly trained and lead by hothead leadership in the exact same scenario. Who do you think is going to make a bigger mess of the situation given the exact same conditions?

I for one would say the smart well trained well lead team is going to get the job done with minimal incidence, casualties and loss over the other one. That's what plays out in so many law enforcement gone wrong situations. Not every law enforcement officer and law enforcement team in every area can and will handle a situation the same. Personal biases, disposition, training and leadership or lack there of any and all areas have a huge influence in what ultimately happens.

It's the same problem all of us have seen in our workplaces ourselves where having a hotheaded dimwit in charge of a bunch of other hotheaded dimwits Vs a calm rational thinking leader in charge a group of other calm rational thinking people makes all the difference in the world regarding how things go at any time.

Personally as a naturally calm thoughtful person who is willing to try comunication first, if possible, if I was in law enforcement I would only take close range headshots after talking to the perpetrator (with smack talk.)!

 

It's the same problem all of us have seen in our workplaces ourselves where having a hotheaded dimwit in charge of a bunch of other hotheaded dimwits Vs a calm rational thinking leader in charge a group of other calm rational thinking people makes all the difference in the world regarding how things go at any time.

Wow, that sounds like it's something happening as we speak.

 

They were warned. I would not have been outraged if they shot them all dead and billed their families for the cleanup.

For trash? So what would you have done to the President of the big oil companies that were warned that their practices were not meeting industry norms and eventually resulted in destroyed beaches and other REAL environmental disasters? Something like Drawn and quartered him and asked his family to I lick up the mess?

 

Wow, that sounds like it's something happening as we speak.

Past experiences in past jobs.

The calm intelligent manager, who kept everyone and everything running smooth, leaves for a better job and the new hotheaded half wit who replaced him comes in and gets every other hothead half wit in the place running wide open with no brains and no guidance (like drives like) until the whole place becomes nothing but a shyte show.

Bad decisions get made constantly leading to major accidents and worse that would have never happened with calmer more thoughtful minds in charge but there weren't any (or enough in key positions) because everyone who had any brains bailed and left well before then only to be replaced by more hotheaded half wits the new guy hired.

Its the very real and largely overlooked problem in running any type of operation. Getting people with the wrong levels of intelligence, education, experience and above all self control in the wrong places ultimately leads to very bad results every time.

It doesn't matter whether its government, big or small business, or public service and works departments or even internet forums and web sites. Having the wrong types of people in the wrong places will make or break a system and its reputation with the general public if given enough time.

We have all seen and continue to see examples of that everywhere every day and too many of us have been, are or will eventually have been or will become victims of the consequences of it in some way.

 

Most of your description sounds like the new supreme leader that so many of you love. Luckily I'm old and so far down the food chain I don't have to worry too much. The country has had a good run, just hate to see it end. But nothing lasts forever.

 

I've had all day to think about this and I believe it is the worst abuse of police power I have ever seen used against American citizens.
The police state escalated a, "not in my back yard" argument into a full military engagement and now they are making up every charge except treason for motives that only exist in their imagination.

This reminds me of two quotations:
Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws, or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence." (That means The U.S. Constitution.)
—Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 659 (1961).

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
John F. Kennedy, In a speech at the White House, 1962
35th president of US 1961-1963 (1917 - 1963)

When rocks and bottles are countered with MRAPs and missile launchers, then followed by the unlimited budget of the court system claiming every crime in their fertile imaginations, the message is that any disagreement with the government can be escalated to any level they want.

I think that headline in post #42 about the cowardly cop would be more informative if it said: Cowardly cop rolls up on fender bender with gun drawn. Unarmed crash victim killed with his hands up. (No charges will be filed.) That's the kind of escalation against peaceful activities and "failure to observe its own laws" that I'm talking about.

In Dakota, the Indians got as violent as they could without any guns when the pipeline workers went miles out of their way to bulldoze burial sites before an injunction could be ruled on when Monday arrived. Then the police show up with a battalion size military force and rejoice at using the Indians for target practice with their, "less lethal" ammunition. When the dust settles, hundreds of protesters are being tried for crimes, many of which never happened, and zero police are being charged.

Who turned it into a shooting war? Are they going to face any penalties?
They pulled that military escalation in Ferguson and the Waco bikers meeting.
They placed agent provocateurs in Occupy Wall Street, then brought in the riot squads.

Anybody want to go with me to protest arresting people who feed the homeless in Tampa?
Sounds pretty dangerous, doesn't it.

 

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.

Excellent.

 

In Dakota, the Indians got as violent as they could without any guns when the pipeline workers went miles out of their way to bulldoze burial sites before an injunction could be ruled on when Monday arrived.

Where exactly did this happen?

Would it be in one of the ~150 eligible sites and locations they were questioned about for relevant significance and consideration yet never responded too?

http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/30/a...sely-suggesting-dapl-desecrated-tribal-lands/

Or was it in the locations that had already been dug up before in previous pipeline work that was a void issue due to having already been dug up before in agreed to settled past work projects?

http://mwalliancenow.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Document-39.pdf