Dallas shooting!

a reply to: MyHappyDogShiner

You can't kill a thought with a gun, but you can kill it with a TV... Quote by me.

I love your quote, and sincerely believe our breakdown in morality and
decency in our culture has been influenced a great deal by TV.

For those who need proof, simply watch an old episode of The Brady Bunch,
followed by an episode of Orange Is The New Black.

The disparity is quite shocking.

a reply to: sg1642

The guy they blew up still had the right to due process, regardless of what crimes he committed....

Nobody forced the cops to be cops, so if they got hurt or killed doing the job they do it is no different than a fireman dying when a burning building collapses on him.

If they blew him up with a goddamned bomb, I think it is safe to assume he was isolated and no longer a threat to anyone in the area.

And he still had the right to due process.

originally posted by: MyHappyDogShiner
a reply to: sg1642

The guy they blew up still had the right to due process, regardless of what crimes he committed....

Nobody forced the cops to be cops, so if they got hurt or killed doing the job they do it is no different than a fireman dying when a burning building collapses on him.

If they blew him up with a goddamned bomb, I think it is safe to assume he was isolated and no longer a threat to anyone in the area.

And he still had the right to due process.

nobody forced him to be a gunman so if he died being a gunman it is no different to when a terrorist dies on the end of a JDAM.

a reply to: sg1642

It is different.

He was a U.S. citizen and he was in the U.S., and he was entitled to due process.

Attitudes like yours are what the constitution and bill of rights were written to control.

a reply to: MyHappyDogShiner

Tell that to the children who don't have a father to tuck them in at night because of him.

a reply to: MyHappyDogShiner

So you would be happy to risk the possibility of another person dying so he could have his due process?

originally posted by: MyHappyDogShiner
POST REMOVED BY STAFF

Let it whip!


We saved court costs

originally posted by: MyHappyDogShiner
a reply to: sg1642

Don't even whip that emotion crap out,and try to twist it around and make it seem like I don't care.

I do care.

You seem like a troll.

you are arguing about the guys rights and he is a mass murderer but I'm a troll??

Look we clearly don't agree on this one. I understand your point and you do have one but we aren't going to agree so let's just agree to disagree on this one.

Anybody see the latest press conference early this afternoon? Chief Brown is still not ready to say it's a lone gunman, despite what Governor Abbot and Mayor Rawlings says.

I find that curious...

interesting link

a reply to: MyHappyDogShiner

Due process does NOT apply to crimes in progress. Due Process applies once in custody. He was still a threat who had every intention of killing more officers until he was taken out. He had no intention of peacefully surrendering and that was confirmed by over 2+ hours of negotiations where the suspect continually lied to police and taunted police. Aside from using a legal robot bomb the other option would have been to use officers and rush his position, which would have resulted in more officers being killed.

The moment the suspect decided not to negotiate in good faith to peacefully end the standoff he forfeited his life.

a reply to: texasgirl

That's because the Mayor and Governor are viewing the situation as a political matter and the Chief views it as a law enforcement investigation which will end once they have determined the guy acted alone and had no help.

a reply to: MyHappyDogShiner

Then what you say is ignorant in the extreme. As it has been, page after page.

They blew him up because he still had the intent and ability to continue to take lives. Your false narrative that he wasn't a threat is just that: false.

Your false narrative that the cops should have just sent officer after officer at him until they took him alive because it's what they signed up for is just that: false.

Pretty easy to construct an "argument" when one bases it off blatant falsehoods colored as facts.

a reply to: Shamrock6

There is just no explaining things to some people is there?. The only information I have regarding this thing is that HE WAS ISOLATED FROM OTHER PEOPLE ENOUGH THAT THEY COULD BLOW HIM UP WITHOUT RISKING ANYONE ELSE'S WELL BEING. WHICH PROVES THEY HAD THE THREAT UNDER CONTROL.

I don't know where you get me stating they should just send officer after officer in to get him, because I never did. I said they could have sent the bot in with knockout gas like they did in a Chechnyan Theatre a few years back when they pumped gas into the ventilation system to knock out terrorists holding hostages, they killed a bunch of hostages because they didn't factor in the unconscious hostages would be on the floor lying in gas that settles to the floor, but in this instance that was not an issue.

If they were out to do what is supposedly their job, they might still be sitting there waiting for him to give up, maybe even sent the bot in with a phone instead of a bomb instead of lying about it, maybe he wanted to talk to a relative before he was allowed the dignity of killing himself. Maybe to give up.

Now that he is dead no one will ever know. The authorities pushed the point and somebody got killed. SUPPOSEDLY.

Who actually knows what happened?, we are just discussing this SUPPOSED occurrence here.

Who actually knows what really happened?. Not you, Not me

Blatant falsehoods and coloured facts?, you're working with the same info as I am. If they had not MURDERED him they might even know if he worked alone or not....

Apparently one of us is simply more of a barbarian than the other.

Go watch your TV.

Obviously it is a horrible tragedy and the killer got exactly what he deserved, just prematurely. It is an insult to anyone who has sworn to uphold the Constitution, including those five brave officers, when it is applied piecemeal or situationally. It has to be applied consistently and not only when safe, convenient or expedient to do so, to the deserving and horrendously undeserving alike, or it is meaningless.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: MyHappyDogShiner

Due process does NOT apply to crimes in progress. Due Process applies once in custody. He was still a threat who had every intention of killing more officers until he was taken out. He had no intention of peacefully surrendering and that was confirmed by over 2+ hours of negotiations where the suspect continually lied to police and taunted police. Aside from using a legal robot bomb the other option would have been to use officers and rush his position, which would have resulted in more officers being killed.

The moment the suspect decided not to negotiate in good faith to peacefully end the standoff he forfeited his life.

Well said.

a reply to: 34thRight

Due process applies everywhere at all times, or it does not apply ever, anywhere.

Precedent has been set for you and me and everyone else to be executed simply out of convenience.

I thought the meme of this website was "Deny Ignorance".

I guess that's just more fluff.

a reply to: Xcathdra

No offense, but that is one of the dumbest things I have ever read here in this forum.

Due process applies everywhere at all times.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I guess then, by your logic that due process does not apply during the commission of a crime, that blowing someones car up because it was exceeding the speed limit would be acceptable to do since the driver is not entitled to anything like rights until he/she is in custody.

Put yourself on the receiving end of that logic and tell me if you think you would agree with that.