It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Would you assume "oh, its just some guy taking a picture", or would you think "it is possible this is the suspect. I need to have him in my sights until I know it is safe".
I mean really. Lets think for a second people.
And again, I have to wonder, at what point do some of you own up to the responsibility of being a member of a society?
Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Originally posted by Afterthought
Do we even know how old the photographer is?
How many of you would change your tune to "this is all fine and dandy" to "no way!" if the person taking the picture was a 10 year old boy or girl?
Not in the least. See my first post in that thread. Do you think a shadowy figure peering out a window is automatically easily identifiable as far as age, sex, skin color, etc? No.
What if it HAD been a shooter? What if the officer did not have his weapon trained, and people got killed because of it. What would you say then?
Originally posted by TexasSeabee
Ok I was going to read the entire thread before I posted but I got to page 5 and couldn't take the arguing.
There are a few things wrong with this photo in my opinion.
1) there is an uparmored hmmwv which is only supposed to used by the US military. No one is legally able to buy or use that vehicle if they aren't part of the federal armed forces. Sure you can get a civilian hummer and make look military but it won't have ballistic windows like that.
2) why is the guy in the turret the only one not wearing a helmet? Everyone else on the street in full gear but this guy has on a backwards baseball cap? anyone riding in the turret of any vehicle always wore a helmet (unless you were a navy seal)
3) I was trained extensively for convoys that took place in a war zone and you never flagged anyone you did not intend to eliminate from existence. We had training exercises repeatedly with large groups yelling and screaming, towns with "suspicious" people in windows, and many other scenarios, but one thing you never did was point your weapon at civilians. You had better be sure that individual was a threat before you pointed a weapon at them, and be double sure they were going to harm you before you pulled that trigger. Hey and guess what that mentality kept us from having unnecessary firefights.
So say what you want and argue it till your blue in the face but in my opinion this guy is sloppy and not well trained. And someone that thinks its more important to look cool and "tactical" shouldn't be on the street with a weapon in public.
Originally posted by muse7
What disturbing path is that?
Advising people not to go outside because there is a terrorist on the run willing to do anything to escape?
Originally posted by sprtpilot
The reason we must not allow "lock down" is simple, our governments are corrupt. Always. They must not, ever, be trusted. They will misuse this.
Originally posted by tyranny22
Why would they think an onlooker would be "him"?
Originally posted by DCPatriot
Originally posted by muse7
What disturbing path is that?
Advising people not to go outside because there is a terrorist on the run willing to do anything to escape?
People who give up their liberty in the name of security....deserve neither.
2nd line.
Originally posted by snowspirit
Originally posted by Danbones
Funny, he can point a gun at you, but you can NOT point a gun at him...
Or any type of picture/video taking apparatus either...
That'll get ya shot.