Meet the People Responsible for the Next Attack on the Police

a reply to: citizen6511

In my opinion, we have too many laws.

a reply to: TheAmazingYeti

A Muslim shoots up a night club in Orlando killing defenseless people, and you post that he had been taunted..... you know, words?

a reply to: TheAmazingYeti

Do you think it makes you a good person to defend murderous racists?

it`s only a thought crime if the thought stays in your head but if put that thought in the public domain either through writing or verbally then it could be a crime.inciting others to commit a crime is a crime in itself.

a reply to: TheBulk

"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." - H.L Mencken

We had 2 deputies killed last week but the guy was white so it was news for about 3 hours then gone. The second funeral was yesterday someone bragged on Facebook they would crash the funeral. He's still in jail awaiting charges and will be for a few days.

a reply to: ATSmediaPRO

Thanks! That's exactly what I was going for with this.

The Detroit Police Chief probably has reason to be afraid in our city. Wasn't he carjacked his first day on the job? LoL (I love my town)


These individuals that have been picked up will be released without charges. More than anything it is a way for the police to say "enough!" and show that they are still in charge. Like it or not LEO's are the ones that create any semblance of civilization in parts of many urban settings. It's not the gangs that people call when they need help. So, when people threaten officers, examples must be made. It's a "we are still in charge" kind of thing.

If you haven't been to Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore, Baghdad, An Najaf, Fallujah, Arta or any other quasi-devastated city, you will not understand that the "perception of might" makes right in a majority of cases. Losing that perception puts lives at risk far more than a change in the RoE.

Where is the "thought crime" in these examples BTW? What I see is written/verbal conveyance of a violent threat.

It's a natural reaction when justice is denied
It can only escalate from here and the police are responsible for it
They have turned their backs on to many innocent people being gunned down by officers of the law
It's a true tragedy

So where are that people?

a reply to: Raggedyman

Innocent? BLM often chooses the most questionable cases to stand on. When the cops are clearly in the wrong, they go to jail.

a reply to: TheAmazingYeti

From your source

The couple lived in a small apartment complex in the northeast section of Dallas that was home to many Muslim immigrants.

Now there’s no specific evidence yet that he was murdered because he was Muslim.

He lived in an area that was high density Muslim immigrants, but you're blaming this on....who? Whites? Anti Muslims? Could he have very well been killed by the same people he shared a community with? Yes. But let's use it as proof of anti Muslim hatred.

originally posted by: Tuomptonite
It's called criminal threat with intent to terrorize. In California, it's a felony. First time offense, punishable by up to 3 years in prison. (Typically get 6 months in county jail) Convicted felons lose their right to vote and bear arms.

I'm not a lawyer but let's just say I've had some experience in this area. Never text, write or leave threats on a voicemail. Even if using it as a figure of speech.

For instance, texting your wife's bf, "I'll kill you", WILL earn you a felony.

*******************************************************************************************************************************
By the same token, does Gang graffiti become "criminal threat with intent to terrorize" ..... it would seem one in the same.

edit on 19-7-2016 by Plotus because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: ATSmediaPRO
a reply to: TheBulk

"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." - H.L Mencken

You think he was talking about incitement to murder that was actually happening? How do ATS mods handle credible death threats?

a reply to: ketsuko

I have seen people shot dead in clips this website
I don't care the colour of their skin, what I have seen is cops shooting people who have done nothing wrong
If you think it's a blm thing, that it's a set up, then we disagree

If a cop kills someone, justice must be served to the community's expectation or, as we see, bad things happen
I am not supporting blm, cop killers or anything. I am saying I understand the outrage

a reply to: TheAmazingYeti

How does arresting one person cause another person to go kill a cop?

It doesn't. Nobody is being forced to go kill cops, and doing so with the notion that it's going to effect a change is erroneous and ignorant.

It may effect a change, but not that one people think it will.

It seems some can, and some can't speak in threats. You can't have it both ways..... or can you. This is from Furguson, pretty much what enflamed and started all this BLM movement.

WARNING, FOUL LANGUAGE, CURSING

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Raggedyman

And I'm saying very often, there are circumstances to the videos that the tape itself does not show. When all the details come out, it is not perfectly innocent man walking down the street suddenly gets shot dead by cop who suddenly decides he'd like to murder a black man for being black. Usually, there are other things going on that the video itself don't tell you.

a reply to: TheAmazingYeti

This might be hard to believe, but the proper response to widespread claims of a violent and overreaching police department is not to arrest people for speaking. It’s to pull back and re-evaluate. This isn’t a small group of malcontents who are causing problems. This is a large percentage of the population who see violence as their only option. They may have been on the fence about violence, the removal of their First Amendment rights by the thin blue line has shown them that discussion is no longer an option for them.

This ^^^.

"When peaceful revolution is impossible, violent revolution is inevitable."

There's a huge problem here that some people refuse to recognize and/or acknowledge -- much less do something about -- because too many people think some lives matter more than others so it's okay to kill first and ask questions later... actually, more like smear the dead person (who cannot defend themselves) in any way possible to "justify" the cold blooded murder.

It is unconscionable that so many people have been killed simply because the officer was "afraid" that the person "might" be a threat... Because many -- perhaps even most -- of those people were not a threat. But they're still dead. Forever.

The sad truth is that LEOs now have a target on their backs because too many put a target on all Black people's backs a long long time ago. Sure, folks can say, "they deserve it," and they do say that... but that doesn't make it true. Any more than it's true to say, "all cops deserve it." But the end result is the same. When folks feel threatened, the fight-or-flight instinct kicks in. And when flight isn't an option, the fight is on.

Whatever LEOs are fearing now from the Black community, it's exactly the same as what too many Blacks have always feared from the LEO community.

I repeat: "When peaceful revolution is impossible, violent revolution is inevitable."

originally posted by: TheBulk
a reply to: TheAmazingYeti

Do you think it makes you a good person to defend murderous racists?

I would ask you the same question: Do YOU think it makes YOU a good person to defend murderous racists???

Because there's no way in hell you can guarantee that no Black men -- not even one -- have ever been killed by racist cops...