To Protect and to Serve II

#15,676
#15,676
EasternVol said:
The ones doing the actual confiscating were not the politicians though. Democrats and Republicans both were responsible.
Click to expand...
Those confiscations occurred under orders. From who? Gov Blanco? Mayor Nagin? Police Superintendent Compass? Or are you asserting some officers just came up with the idea on their own?
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#15,677
#15,677
lawgator1 said:
Having litigated this issue literally hundreds if not a thousand times, I can tell you why you are wrong, at least in the contexts of shootings, which seems to be the one folks complain about the most.

When cops draw a weapon and encounter an unknown cirumstance, they do not have time to reflect on their "safety net."
Click to expand...
so in your opinion, the trained person that we expect to uphold our safety, and whose litteral job to deal with these situations gets protection from the courts because they don't have to to reflect on the safety net; but someone defending their own family in their own house shouldn't get the same safety net?
 
#15,678
#15,678
hndog609 said:
Those confiscations occurred under orders. From who? Gov Blanco? Mayor Nagin? Police Superintendent Compass? Or are you asserting some officers just came up with the idea on their own?
Click to expand...
So the ones physically confiscating the guns were just following orders, got it. They were still confiscating guns though. You're really reaching with that last bit.
 
#15,679
#15,679
EasternVol said:
So the ones physically confiscating the guns were just following orders, got it. They were still confiscating guns though. You're really reaching with that last bit.
Click to expand...
I"M reaching? Seriously? Let's make this simple.
Guns were confiscated. Yes or no?
The ONLY reason they were confiscated is because people issued orders to do so. Yes or no?
Who was responsible for issuing those orders?

The who did what actually on the ground is absolutely, positively and unambiguously downstream from the above questions. The odd part is there is not a single person reading this, including you, that isn't aware of this fact.

If you must make some kind of "who follows orders" observation (Ras has been a big proponent of that over the years) then so be it but it's 100% the primary issue of who gives the orders or the rest literally doesn't matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#15,680
#15,680
hndog609 said:
I"M reaching? Seriously? Let's make this simple.
Guns were confiscated. Yes or no?
The ONLY reason they were confiscated is because people issued orders to do so. Yes or no?
Who was responsible for issuing those orders?

The who did what actually on the ground is absolutely, positively and unambiguously downstream from the above questions. The odd part is there is not a single person reading this, including you, that isn't aware of this fact.

If you must make some kind of "who follows orders" observation (Ras has been a big proponent of that over the years) then so be it but it's 100% the primary issue of who gives the orders or the rest literally doesn't matter.
Click to expand...
The inital assertion was that it was 'Democrats confiscating guns'. I pointed out that many of those those doing the physical confiscations were certainly Republicans so followers of both parties were responsible. The orders weren't the only reason guns were confiscated. If the robots hadn't followed those orders they wouldn't have been.
 
#15,681
#15,681
EasternVol said:
The inital assertion was that it was 'Democrats confiscating guns'. I pointed out that many of those those doing the physical confiscations were certainly Republicans so followers of both parties were responsible. The orders weren't the only reason guns were confiscated. If the robots hadn't followed those orders they wouldn't have been.
Click to expand...
the issue is you are choosing the third or fourth domino to fall, and assigning the blame there. some blame is there, these cops should have been like NM sheriffs refusing their governors ban on guns; but the larger real fault lies further up the food chain.

especially when the higher ups in the food chain can just replace those lower down until they find someone to do it. so even if you fixed these republican cops, you wouldn't have solved the gun grabbing issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#15,682
#15,682
EasternVol said:
The inital assertion was that it was 'Democrats confiscating guns'. I pointed out that many of those those doing the physical confiscations were certainly Republicans so followers of both parties were responsible. The orders weren't the only reason guns were confiscated. If the robots hadn't followed those orders they wouldn't have been.
Click to expand...
Look EV, as stated previously if you want to have a conversation about "following orders" it wouldn't be the first time it's come up in this thread. Your devaluation of the origin of there, no really, seriously, ever being a confiscation at all is bewildering. Has there ever been an order followed without an order given? AT BEST you might be able to eke out an observation that comes across as "The confiscation orders issued by Democratic leadership wasn't universally rejected outright by some that might vote Republican.". That sound like a strong stance to you? When police chief Eddie Compass announced

"No one will be able to be armed. Guns will be taken. Only law enforcement will be allowed to have guns."

who do you really think is carrying the greater onus of culpability here? (btw Compass resigned 4 days after the successful injunction placed against the legality of the confiscations)

In happier news this mess brought about the Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act.
 
#15,683
#15,683
LouderVol said:
so in your opinion, the trained person that we expect to uphold our safety, and whose litteral job to deal with these situations gets protection from the courts because they don't have to to reflect on the safety net; but someone defending their own family in their own house shouldn't get the same safety net?
Click to expand...


That's a bit vague. And there are stand your ground laws out there.
 
#15,684
#15,684
LouderVol said:
the issue is you are choosing the third or fourth domino to fall, and assigning the blame there. some blame is there, these cops should have been like NM sheriffs refusing their governors ban on guns; but the larger real fault lies further up the food chain.

especially when the higher ups in the food chain can just replace those lower down until they find someone to do it. so even if you fixed these republican cops, you wouldn't have solved the gun grabbing issue.
Click to expand...
If you read what I wrote you'd see that I am assigning blame to all the actors and not just the cops.
 
#15,685
#15,685
hndog609 said:
Look EV, as stated previously if you want to have a conversation about "following orders" it wouldn't be the first time it's come up in this thread. Your devaluation of the origin of there, no really, seriously, ever being a confiscation at all is bewildering. Has there ever been an order followed without an order given? AT BEST you might be able to eke out an observation that comes across as "The confiscation orders issued by Democratic leadership wasn't universally rejected outright by some that might vote Republican.". That sound like a strong stance to you? When police chief Eddie Compass announced

"No one will be able to be armed. Guns will be taken. Only law enforcement will be allowed to have guns."

who do you really think is carrying the greater onus of culpability here? (btw Compass resigned 4 days after the successful injunction placed against the legality of the confiscations)

In happier news this mess brought about the Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act.
Click to expand...
Still, it wasn't only Democrats confiscating guns. Republicans played their part, which is the point.
 
#15,687
#15,687
EasternVol said:
It was law enforcement and not politicians confiscating the guns. LEO's tend to be Republicans.
Click to expand...
I’ll put the caveat in there that there is a certain number of those that are republicans that are Leo’s. Pinning that down with way is almost impossible.
For the most part it was a city council, mayor, police chief and dog catcher that were democrats.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#15,688
#15,688
lawgator1 said:
That's a bit vague. And there are stand your ground laws out there.
Click to expand...
Cops get protection if its a good shoot or a bad shoot.
civilians don't get protection if its a bad shoot.

in a bad shoot, the cops may "just" get protection from the criminal side of things, the city/jurisdiction pays any fine. the cop at worst, typically gets fired, and can't get a job as cop. A civilian goes to jail. a civilian pays any civil fees.

and just talking about pure split second decisions, not a cop executing someone.

kinda like you are worried about a civilian responding to a mass shooting and hitting another innocent person. but I have yet to see you express any concern about cops returning fire in the same situation despite the same level of risk.
 
#15,689
#15,689
I didn’t know where else to put this…… but as the father of four daughters, I don’t think this man should be charged with anything
www.yahoo.com

Arkansas father arrested after allegedly killing man he found with his missing 14-year-old daughter

An Arkansas father was arrested after he allegedly shot and killed a man who he found in a vehicle with his missing 14-year-old daughter, according to the sheriff's office.
www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com
. "This man was Chief of police in Indiana and resource officer, giving us a better idea of why the Lonoke county courts have been protecting him and going after my husband."
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman
#15,690
#15,690
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#15,693
#15,693
hog88 said:
IDK if you can sue the US Marshal service or how much you can sue them for but I hope this woman gets enough to set her whole family up for life. Even if she was the right woman they were looking for WTF would they need 6 Marshals to arrest a 70 year old woman for a parole violation from 1999?

New police body cam video shows false arrest in wild case of mistaken identity
Click to expand...
I have actually been the victim of mistaken identity before. Deputy pulled his pistol on me in a convenience store, and I asked "What the hell are you doing???!!" The barrel of a .40 caliber is much larger than you think when you are looking right down it BTW. I was cuffed and other officers showed up. They were standing around just chatting to one another with me standing there in hand cuffs. Finally after me continually asking them what this was about, they asked me what I was driving. I nodded towards my F150. They asked again what I was driving, and again I nodded towards the truck. They still stood there talking, they didn't actually believe that was my truck. I finally got frustrated and just started walking to the door and shouldered my way through it, they followed. I stood beside my truck and said "This is my truck". I was asked if the keys were in my pocket, and I said yes. They fished them out and tried them and said; "Well, they work!" I said; "Yes, because this is my truck!" They uncuffed me and told me that someone with a rolling meth lab had gotten rear ended near by, and that one of them was wearing a camouflage jacket (I had one on at the time) when they fled. Keep in mind that this was in November during deer season. They apologized, and went in the store and did the same. I was not a happy camper. Lots of people have camo on in November. Good grief.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, Carl Pickens, EasternVol and 2 others
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top