Members banned from this thread: Safety |
Cool it down, please.
Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler
Okay, go ahead and cite Article of the Constitution that grants the government the power to shoot unarmed women who pose no imminent threat.
You and your ilk feel its okay to break into any building you want, vandalize, commit theft and murder.
I don't think anyone here has said that. what makes you believe your statement is true?
Go find a nice banana republic to set up shop, you'll feel right at home.
Banana Republics are generally where it is okay for government officials to shoot unarmed civilians engaged in protest. It actually sounds more like you are the one supporting the United States becoming a banana republic. Now, I don't think you actually want that. Pelosi might. Harris definitely would. Biden thinks a banana republic is where the grocery store gets the bananas his wife cuts up and mashes for him.
As a reminder, you lost the election; get over it.
Were you sticking your tongue out at him when you typed that?
“Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.” - Barry Goldwater
I realize the US Constitution does not directly address this, however the law in Washington, DC doesn't specify the sex of the person just that certain conditions have to be met in order to shoot. I have posted a link which describes the self defense law in Washington, DC.
https://statelaws.findlaw.com/dc-law...ense-laws.html
I believe it is true to do a lack of sufficient condemnation by the poster whom I was responding back to.
I can only speak for myself in saying of course I don't want a banana republic here. That being said I got the impression based on the posters original response to my original posting being that he was predicting a war will occur, which is something I'd expect to find in a banana republic.
No, but I'll keep it in mind the next time I use that phrase.
God Bless America, God Bless our Military and God Bless the Police who defended the country against the insurgents on January 6, 2021
Think 3rd party for 2024 folks. Clean up America.
Once I tell you that we agree to disagree there will be no more discussion between us in the thread so please don't waste your time continuing to argue your points because I will not respond.
I'm not taking any position on this one way or another because I think that this situation was particularly unique:
"The U.S. Capitol Police officer who killed an Air Force vet when a mob stormed the beacon of democracy on Wednesday “didn’t have a choice at that time,” a GOP lawmaker who witnessed the shooting said Thursday. “They were trying to come through the front door, which is where I was at in the chamber, and in the back they were trying to come through the speaker’s lobby, and that’s problematic when you’re trying to defend two fronts,” Rep. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) said on Good Morning America. “When they broke the glass in the back, the [police] lieutenant that was there—him and I already had multiple conversations prior to this—and he didn’t have a choice at that time. The mob was going to come through the door, there was a lot of members and staff that were in danger at the time. And when he [drew] his weapon, that’s a decision that’s very hard for anyone to make and, once you draw your weapon like that, you have to defend yourself with deadly force.”"
Officer Who Killed Ashli Babbitt, Air Force Vet in Capitol Riot, ‘Didn’t Have a Choice,’ GOP Lawmaker Says (thedailybeast.com)
The officers protecting the members of the House and staff would have been vastly outnumbered by the mob trying to get in and I think that it was clear to the officers that the mob wasn't breaking in just to trespass - they were coming after members of the House.
Was firing a warning shot an option? Were these officers equipped with anything other than their handguns i.e. tasers or pepper spray?
In quoting my post, you affirm and agree that you have not been goaded, provoked, emotionally manipulated or otherwise coerced into responding.
"The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problems.”
Mahatma Gandhi
They were sure quick on the trigger to protect the political class. But you can bet your ass if someone gunned down a violent BLM rioter trying to light their store on fire, they'd be hit with a murder charge.
What you don't understand -- what you have never understood -- is that blacks are not singled-out by law enforcement for rough treatment. Sure, that's all the media shows you, but you're smart enough to do your own research. You're smart enough not to fall for that $#@!.
Sometimes, the police can get out of hand--that's true--but there is no systemic discrimination against blacks. Individual cases do not create a whole narrative. White suspects are more likely to be killed than black suspects. Your whining and crybaby attitude not withstanding.
Why is it you can't help but argue for your limitations? For victimhood? Is that what you really want? From where I sit, it sure looks like it.
Floyd didn't own the knee on the neck thing.
main-qimg-fcbc9d6fbc496790f9900fd784ad4d3f.jpg
AP_20203822499902-1-1024x640.jpg
America_Protests_Worldwide_Chokeholds_20154559819854.jpg
TKP2H3C56VBB7M7RGBHJJX4WQM.jpg
""A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul" ~George Bernard Shaw
Never heard of her. her death is sad and could have been avoided. I don't see how her skin color is an issue. People say Bill Maher is a comedian. When? I don't know what else to say.