SCOTUS will increase to 11 or 13 Justices

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Members don't see this ad.
Aether2000 said:
If he isn't taken out by election, he will be taken out by other means.
Click to expand...
1600963906292.gif
 
B747FFAE-78D7-4282-9C62-C6AB026134DF.jpeg

Its truly sad, politics are so polarizing today that even if both sides agree on a subject/solution, they will never bring it to fruition out of fear the other side may politically come out ahead..... and the American people are caught in the middle 🙁
 
NontradCA said:
He’s not a evil super villain, he’s a dumb narcissist. That’s all there is to him, I wish it was different, but it is what it is. He will obviously do anything he can to stay in power. If he were an evil super villain he wouldn’t be so brazen and foolish about it. What super villains you know reveal their plot in the first act?
Click to expand...
You don't gotta convince me. You gotta convince those out there (highly educated physicians no less) who truly believe that he's sacrificing 'hundreds of thousands of American lives" or the he's Hitleresque.
 
DoctwoB said:
Thus far there hasn’t been banning of research activity. There has been cancellation of any conferences, presentations, or trainings that touch on the topics of race, gender, or disparities. Part of this is because regardless of what Trumps press release states, his orders are translated by the VA secretary into policy. As of now that is the current policy, though it sounds like leadership is in disarray trying to suddenly implement one of Trumps ideas and it may or may not change moving forward.
Click to expand...

I mean, here at USUHS we have had a bunch of trainings and meetings on those subjects. We literally had one today, and tomorrow there is a presentation on race disparities in child birth and infant mortality. We discuss gender, sexuality, and race disparities a lot.

Is this just a VA thing you’re talking about?
 
Matthew9Thirtyfive said:
I mean, here at USUHS we have had a bunch of trainings and meetings on those subjects. We literally had one today, and tomorrow there is a presentation on race disparities in child birth and infant mortality. We discuss gender, sexuality, and race disparities a lot.

Is this just a VA thing you’re talking about?
Click to expand...

The executive order applies beyond the VA to federal employees and contractors. I didn't read finely enough to see if schools are exempted, or maybe your status as a student earning service time is different. However, remember that a executive order is words on paper. They require people to put them into action. The VA director took a relatively aggressive approach to this. Whomever it is in the military chain of command that would be responsible for implementing it at USUHS may (deliberately or through incompetence) be being lax on the matter.
 
DoctwoB said:
The executive order applies beyond the VA to federal employees and contractors. I didn't read finely enough to see if schools are exempted, or maybe your status as a student earning service time is different. However, remember that a executive order is words on paper. They require people to put them into action. The VA director took a relatively aggressive approach to this. Whomever it is in the military chain of command that would be responsible for implementing it at USUHS may (deliberately or through incompetence) be being lax on the matter.
Click to expand...

Yeah I didn’t read it at all, which is why I asked. I know here and at Walter Reed they are still doing that stuff, but I’m not sure whether that’s against the rules or whatever. I think the faculty here would have a fit if they suddenly weren’t allowed to teach about racial disparities.
 
radsisrad said:


Click to expand...


Hmm, many people in the administration and military undermining trump or resigning or both. Must be because he was just making America TOO great, right?

Also I love the conflation of people protesting against police violence to plotting to undermine the very idea of democracy. Tomato Tomahto.
 
DoctwoB said:
Hmm, many people in the administration and military undermining trump or resigning or both. Must be because he was just making America TOO great, right?

Also I love the conflation of people protesting against police violence to plotting to undermine the very idea of democracy. Tomato Tomahto.
Click to expand...

I don’t think the people peacefully protesting legitimate police brutality is what he’s talking about.
 
DoctwoB said:
Hmm, many people in the administration and military undermining trump or resigning or both. Must be because he was just making America TOO great, right?

Also I love the conflation of people protesting against police violence to plotting to undermine the very idea of democracy. Tomato Tomahto.
Click to expand...

I, too, burn dumpsters, indiscriminately smash car windows and storefronts, throw Molotov cocktails, castigate entire races, establish "autonomous zones", commit arson, and harass restaurant-goers when overcome by existential angst about statistically-insignificant police violence.
 
radsisrad said:
I, too, burn dumpsters, indiscriminately smash car windows and storefronts, throw Molotov cocktails, castigate entire races, establish "autonomous zones", commit arson, and harass restaurant-goers when overcome by existential angst about statistically-insignificant police violence.
Click to expand...

Didn’t you know that every time a cop shoots someone, it’s unjustified?
 
radsisrad said:
I, too, burn dumpsters, indiscriminately smash car windows and storefronts, throw Molotov cocktails, castigate entire races, establish "autonomous zones", commit arson, and harass restaurant-goers when overcome by existential angst about statistically-insignificant police violence.
Click to expand...

Its funny because I seem to recall far more murders and terrorist acts from right wing extremists compared to the left. Maybe we don’t hear about it because of who is controlling the message.

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

Redirect Notice

www.google.com
 
radsisrad said:


Click to expand...


Lol, that's quite the next level conspiracy theorizing, playing the victim, and "bbbbbbut the dems" ....but I assume y'all gotta do something to get over the cognitive dissonance of supporting the only president who's ever said he won't accept a peaceful transition of power and who currently is hatching a scheme at the state level to steal electors.


Tangentially, one of the things that got lost in all the 2020 news was the GOP Senate Intelligrnce Committee's own report on the Russian interference showing that there was plenty of probable cause for an investigation of the Trump campaign's ties to Russia
 
vector2 said:
Lol, that's quite the next level playing the victim and "bbbbbbut the dems" ....but I assume y'all gotta do something to get over the cognitive dissonance of supporting the only president who's ever said he won't accept a peaceful transition of power and who currently is hatching a scheme at the state level to steal electors.
Click to expand...

Gotta love the mental gymnastics of the right who say “follow the rule of law” except when it comes to the actual rule of law regarding elections.
 
vector2 said:
Lol, that's quite the next level conspiracy theorizing, playing the victim, and "bbbbbbut the dems" ....but I assume y'all gotta do something to get over the cognitive dissonance of supporting the only president who's ever said he won't accept a peaceful transition of power and who currently is hatching a scheme at the state level to steal electors.
Click to expand...

Not saying I don’t believe it, but is there evidence that he’s actually hatching said scheme other than speculation from a writer for The Atlantic? Asking seriously.
 
DirtDocMD said:
Not to get off on a tangent, but if the Dems want to pass a law that says “abortion is legal”, that is a lot different from the Court saying, “The Constitution grants the right to abortion.”. THAT is the “legal” (obviously there are plenty with a moral) rub with what the Court did in Roe. Many felt the Court, in effect, “created” an amendment which did not exist.

If “self-determination of one’s body” is the standard, then how has the “Draft” ever been legal?? Is telling someone they have to “fight for their country” for two years, any less oppressive then telling someone they need to “carry a pregnancy of a future citizen” for nine months?? Either way, isn’t the Government “telling you what to do with your body”??

Anyway, there’s one side talking court packing/ending filibuster/impeachment/ending the electoral college/riots/looting, and another side that is talking about nominating a Justice, and having the Senate “advise and consent” (vote) on them.

Which one is trying to “fundamentally transform” the way things are done, and which one is simply following the letter of the law, as it stands, today?
Click to expand...
I mean, they got to this position by ignoring their duties to appoint justices. The problem is them making up a fake rule and then ignoring that rule when it is convenient. Had they not done that and just appointed a reasonable Obama nominee things would be fine right now
 
vector2 said:
Lol, that's quite the next level conspiracy theorizing, playing the victim, and "bbbbbbut the dems" ....but I assume y'all gotta do something to get over the cognitive dissonance of supporting the only president who's ever said he won't accept a peaceful transition of power and who currently is hatching a scheme at the state level to steal electors.
Click to expand...

A "peaceful transfer of power" is a cosmic impossibility when the Left encourages and supports nationwide terrorism from NYC to Louisville to Seattle to Portland. Leftists hyperventilated and bit**ed about a few hundred Trump voters (of which I was not one in 2016, btw) milling about with semiautomatic rifles protesting masks, but that was positively idyllic compared to what happens when Leftists gather.
 
Matthew9Thirtyfive said:
Not saying I don’t believe it, but is there evidence that he’s actually hatching said scheme other than speculation from a writer for The Atlantic? Asking seriously.
Click to expand...

The GOP chair of Pennsylvania flat out admitted that he's in on the scheme....

"
In an article in the Atlantic published Wednesday, Pennsylvania GOP Chairman Lawrence Tabas says that if there are “significant flaws” with the election, then the state’s Republican-controlled legislature might just decide the election on its own, adding that he’s discussed the idea with the Trump campaign.

“I’ve mentioned it to them, and I hope they’re thinking about it too,” he said.
 
Mad Jack said:
I mean, they got to this position by ignoring their duties to appoint justices. The problem is them making up a fake rule and then ignoring that rule when it is convenient. Had they not done that and just appointed a reasonable Obama nominee things would be fine right now
Click to expand...

I realize that it's in vogue to slobber all over Ginsburg, but how narcissistic does one have to be to stay in that position after multiple pancreatic cancer recurrences? She could and should have left during Obama's terms if she was so concerned about the Court's direction.
 
radsisrad said:
A "peaceful transfer of power" is a cosmic impossibility when the Left encourages and supports nationwide terrorism from NYC to Louisville to Seattle to Portland. Leftists hyperventilated and bit**ed about a few hundred Trump voters (of which I was not one in 2016, btw) milling about with semiautomatic rifles protesting masks, but that was positively idyllic compared to what happens when Leftists gather.
Click to expand...

The phrase "peaceful transfer of power" has nothing to do with your mischaracterizations of domestic protests or any violence that's occurring. It refers to the leader of the country changing hands democratically by conceding without involvement of the military or federal law enforcement apparatus forcibly changing the occupant of the WH.
 
vector2 said:
The GOP chair of Pennsylvania flat out admitted that he's in on the scheme....

"
In an article in the Atlantic published Wednesday, Pennsylvania GOP Chairman Lawrence Tabas says that if there are “significant flaws” with the election, then the state’s Republican-controlled legislature might just decide the election on its own, adding that he’s discussed the idea with the Trump campaign.

“I’ve mentioned it to them, and I hope they’re thinking about it too,” he said.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Doesn’t surprise me.
 
PainDrain said:
What about the fact that the GOP led effort to investigate Biden and Ukrainian corruption fell flat on its face. Farging waste of money.
Click to expand...

They’re going after it again. Rand is pushing to send it to the DOJ because of “new info” about Biden’s son and the Ukraine.
 
radsisrad said:
This is what happened the last time The Atlantic ran its proverbial mouth with gutter sensationalism. Tabloid nonsense.
Click to expand...

One more time for those so anxious to reply that they cant even be bothered to read the previous posts

"
The GOP chair of Pennsylvania flat out admitted that he's in on the scheme....

"
In an article in the Atlantic published Wednesday, Pennsylvania GOP Chairman Lawrence Tabas says that if there are “significant flaws” with the election, then the state’s Republican-controlled legislature might just decide the election on its own, adding that he’s discussed the idea with the Trump campaign.

“I’ve mentioned it to them, and I hope they’re thinking about it too,” he said.
"
 
radsisrad said:
A "peaceful transfer of power" is a cosmic impossibility when the Left encourages and supports nationwide terrorism from NYC to Louisville to Seattle to Portland. Leftists hyperventilated and bit**ed about a few hundred Trump voters (of which I was not one in 2016, btw) milling about with semiautomatic rifles protesting masks, but that was positively idyllic compared to what happens when Leftists gather.
Click to expand...

Again please look at who has committed the vast majority of domestic terrorist acts since 2000 and stop flapping your gums about a small minority of protesters that have caused violence.
 
radsisrad said:
I realize that it's in vogue to slobber all over Ginsburg, but how narcissistic does one have to be to stay in that position after multiple pancreatic cancer recurrences? She could and should have left during Obama's terms if she was so concerned about the Court's direction.
Click to expand...
Judges shouldn't play politics by timing their retirements
 
PainDrain said:
Its funny because I seem to recall far more murders and terrorist acts from right wing extremists compared to the left. Maybe we don’t hear about it because of who is controlling the message.
Click to expand...

To help jog your memory, I will remind you that every single physical attack, incendiary device thrown, act of arson committed, and window smashed in these riots is a terrorist act.

Are you really sure that you want to tally these up?
 
Mad Jack said:
Judges shouldn't play politics by timing their retirements
Click to expand...

When you have recurrent pancreatic cancer, you don't belong on the Supreme Court. Regardless of when you choose to hang up the robe.
 
radsisrad said:
To help jog your memory, I will remind you that every single physical attack, incendiary device thrown, act of arson committed, and window smashed in these riots is a terrorist act.

Are you really sure that you want to tally these up?
Click to expand...

haha. Oh so there have been literally hundreds of thousands right? Your argument is a joke.
 
radsisrad said:
A "peaceful transfer of power" is a cosmic impossibility when the Left encourages and supports nationwide terrorism from NYC to Louisville to Seattle to Portland. Leftists hyperventilated and bit**ed about a few hundred Trump voters (of which I was not one in 2016, btw) milling about with semiautomatic rifles protesting masks, but that was positively idyllic compared to what happens when Leftists gather.
Click to expand...
The left in general supports the right of people to protest, not riot. Most of the protests have been peaceful, and even in locations where the protests haven't been peaceful, destruction has been engaged in by a fractional minority of individuals
 
Mad Jack said:
The left in general supports the right of people to protest, not riot. Most of the protests have been peaceful, and even in locations where the protests haven't been peaceful, destruction has been engaged in by a fractional minority of individuals
Click to expand...
I believe the number is 93% have been peaceful.
 
PainDrain said:
haha. Oh so there have been literally hundreds of thousands right? Your argument is a joke.
Click to expand...

A "joke" supported by the FBI, for whatever that's worth at the moment.

www.fbi.gov

Terrorism 2002/2005 | Federal Bureau of Investigation

www.fbi.gov www.fbi.gov
.

Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives” (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85).
Click to expand...
 
Doubled down today even after mitch rebuked him

"
President Trump declined for a second straight day to commit to a peaceful transfer of power if he lost the election, repeating baseless assertions that the voting would be a “big scam,” even as leading Republicans scrambled to assure the public that their party would respect the Constitution.

“We want to make sure that the election is honest, and I’m not sure that it can be,” Mr. Trump told reporters on Thursday before leaving the White House for North Carolina."

www.nytimes.com

Trump Again Sows Doubt About Election as G.O.P. Scrambles to Assure Voters (Published 2020)

President Trump declined for a second day to commit to a peaceful transfer of power if he lost the election, while Republicans, including Mitch McConnell, implicitly rebuffed him, promising an “orderly transition.”
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
 
Mad Jack said:
The left in general supports the right of people to protest, not riot. Most of the protests have been peaceful, and even in locations where the protests haven't been peaceful, destruction has been engaged in by a fractional minority of individuals
Click to expand...

Define “in general.” I’m pretty liberal, and I’ve seen a remarkable number of people on the left completely justify rioting and violence by saying it’s warranted and the only way things will change. There were entire campaigns on social media where if you even dared to suggest that maybe destruction of innocent businesses and homes wasn’t the way to protest something, you were immediately called racist.

I think maybe on tv a lot of politicians on the left will say they don’t support rioting, but they are eating it up in private. There’s a reason you only see things like BLM and a different story about a police officer in the news before any facts of the case are even released in election years, and it’s not because cops are suddenly racist every four years.
 
Matthew9Thirtyfive said:
Define “in general.” I’m pretty liberal, and I’ve seen a remarkable number of people on the left completely justify rioting and violence by saying it’s warranted and the only way things will change. There were entire campaigns on social media where if you even dared to suggest that maybe destruction of innocent businesses and homes wasn’t the way to protest something, you were immediately called racist.

I think maybe on tv a lot of politicians on the left will say they don’t support rioting, but they are eating it up in private. There’s a reason you only see things like BLM and a different story about a police officer in the news before any facts of the case are even released in election years, and it’s not because cops are suddenly racist every four years.
Click to expand...
Police simply have poor training and standards. They aren’t inherently evil. I’m not sure what kinds of crowds you hang around but the vast majority of liberals I know don’t condone any violence or rioting. Obama and Biden spoke against it before the right did. I’m not sure why Biden has to account for those people if Trump doesn’t have to account for all the white supremacists who support him, murder people in his ideological name.
 
PainDrain said:
haha. Oh so there have been literally hundreds of thousands right? Your argument is a joke.
Click to expand...

The issue with the stats you’re quoting is that it looks at terror attacks. Yes, right wing terrorism has been the majority for a long time. In fact, over the last like 26 years, right wing attacks make up 57% of the total versus only about 25% for left-wing (the rest are religious or unclassified—perhaps not surprisingly, all the religious acts were related to Islam).

However, when you look at that data, it is not including acts of regular violence. So literally none of the riots, attacks on police officers, etc. are counted in those numbers. Unfortunately there is a lot of violence from us on the left just like there is on the right, and to deny that is to try to smudge the numbers and hope no one notices.
 
NontradCA said:
Police simply have poor training and standards. They aren’t inherently evil. I’m not sure what kinds of crowds you hang around but the vast majority of liberals I know don’t condone any violence or rioting. Obama and Biden spoke against it before the right did.
Click to expand...

I don’t associate with people who support senseless violence, but I have seen it literally all over social media. Instagram, Facebook, Twitter. Huge numbers of people justifying the riots and violence. This is not like something only I have noticed lol.

And police across the board do not have poor training. Some do. The vast, vast majority of uses of force in this country are justified. Just because they are committed against an unarmed black man in an election year doesn’t make them unjustified, and the idea that an officer is guilty before any facts of the case are involved is a dangerous sentiment that is carted out in election years like clockwork. In three months, all the people shouting about police violence while ignoring all of the statistically significant issues harming people of color will go back to pretending like everything is fine, just like they did 4 years ago.

Edit: this stuff happens every four years. Every unarmed black man shot by police the media can find is put up as a martyr before any facts are presented, meant to stir up racial tension and fear and anger. And then almost every single time, when the body cam footage comes out or the cell phone videos are put out in full, it turns out that he wasn’t just standing there with his hands up getting shot.

Does police brutality exist? Yes. Police officers are people, and people are not perfect. Not every use of force is police brutality. Most of it isn’t. It happens in a very small minority of cases, and those officers should be punished. And I do agree that officers should undergo regular training if they don’t already (I know some do).

In the security forces in the Navy, we had weekly drills on active shooters, use of force, etc. And in the situations I was ultimately in where things started to escalate, I was able to de-escalate without anyone getting hurt because I had drilled it so much. No reason civilian cops can’t train quarterly.
 
Last edited:
Matthew9Thirtyfive said:
I don’t associate with people who support senseless violence, but I have seen it literally all over social media. Instagram, Facebook, Twitter. Huge numbers of people justifying the riots and violence. This is not like something only I have noticed lol.

And police across the board do not have poor training. Some do. The vast, vast majority of uses of force in this country are justified. Just because they are committed against an unarmed black man in an election year doesn’t make them unjustified, and the idea that an officer is guilty before any facts of the case are involved is a dangerous sentiment that is carted out in election years like clockwork. In three months, all the people shouting about police violence while ignoring all of the statistically significant issues harming people of color will go back to pretending like everything is fine, just like they did 4 years ago.

Edit: this stuff happens every four years. Every unarmed black man shot by police the media can find is put up as a martyr before any facts are presented, meant to stir up racial tension and fear and anger. And then almost every single time, when the body cam footage comes out or the cell phone videos are put out in full, it turns out that he wasn’t just standing there with his hands up getting shot.

Does police brutality exist? Yes. Police officers are people, and people are not perfect. Not every use of force is police brutality. Most of it isn’t. It happens in a very small minority of cases, and those officers should be punished. And I do agree that officers should undergo regular training if they don’t already (I know some do).

In the security forces in the Navy, we had weekly drills on active shooters, use of force, etc. And in the situations I was ultimately in where things started to escalate, I was able to de-escalate without anyone getting hurt because I had drilled it so much. No reason civilian cops can’t train quarterly.
Click to expand...
Lol@ seeing stuff over social media. There’s your first mistake. Police absolutely have poor training and I use my time in the Navy, ironically, similar to you, to make that case. During OEF 1 and 2, the homies and I, literally trained to kill people handled ourselves with extreme restraint. I don’t understand why police can’t have similar training and be held to the same standard.

On the flip side I’ve been on the receiving end of many police profiling, and managed not to get my ass kicked and shot. People need to have some personal responsibility.

And yea I agree white people will move onto something else once it’s no longer cool to take SJesque selfies for the ‘gram.
 
Matthew9Thirtyfive said:
Define “in general.” I’m pretty liberal, and I’ve seen a remarkable number of people on the left completely justify rioting and violence by saying it’s warranted and the only way things will change. There were entire campaigns on social media where if you even dared to suggest that maybe destruction of innocent businesses and homes wasn’t the way to protest something, you were immediately called racist.

I think maybe on tv a lot of politicians on the left will say they don’t support rioting, but they are eating it up in private. There’s a reason you only see things like BLM and a different story about a police officer in the news before any facts of the case are even released in election years, and it’s not because cops are suddenly racist every four years.
Click to expand...

My wife is a business owner so I can pretty comfortably say that like Al Sharpton or Biden or pretty much all the families of the innocent black people who have been killed, I don't support indiscriminate rioting and looting because it distracts from the underlying message of BLM while also dishonoring the victims.

That being said, I make an attempt to understand where people are coming from who disagree. Look at what happened with Breonna Taylor. Within the cover of authority of the KY AG and "the law," an officer of the law can irresponsibly take an innocent's life inside their own home and the only consequence that he faces is essentially a charge for damaging the neighbors' walls. From that perspective, it seems contradictory and ineffective to protest from within the confines of law when your oppressor "bends" the law to support his prerogatives.
 
NontradCA said:
Lol@ seeing stuff over social media. There’s your first mistake. Police absolutely have poor training and I use my time in the Navy, ironically, similar to you, to make that case. During OEF 1 and 2, the homies and I, literally trained to kill people handled ourselves with extreme restraint. I don’t understand why police can’t have similar training and be held to the same standard.

On the flip side I’ve been on the receiving end of many police profiling, and managed not to get my ass kicked and shot.

And yea I agree white people will move onto something else once it’s no longer cool to take SJesque selfies for the ‘gram.
Click to expand...

You didn’t say anything I disagree with. Although I will say that I don’t think across the board they have poor training. I think they could be trained better and they could train more, like I said. We got excellent training in the Navy, and like I said I was able to de-escalate every situation I was in, which included some cases with crazy civilians who wanted to throw down. I could have used force and been justified, but I didn’t because I did what I used to think was an excessive amount of training until I was in fire fights and escalating contacts and realized that the training they gave me was what got me home.

Maybe it’s small sample size, but my dad, father in law, and several of my friends are or were cops and all had really good training. Some of their departments do continuing training as well. There’s no reason why they all can’t do that.

However, I do think there’s a difference between what the police are doing and what we do. Restraint is all well and good, but if someone is trying to stab or shoot you for pulling them over, that has to go out the window. They also don’t have the safety in numbers like we do. Many times it’s literally one cop. Maybe if more departments went to two cops per unit and had a policy of only contacting potentially dangerous people with more than one unit, we’d see less use of force.
 
vector2 said:
My wife is a business owner so I can pretty comfortably say that like Al Sharpton or Biden or pretty much all the families of the innocent black people who have been killed, I don't support indiscriminate rioting and looting because it distracts from the underlying message of BLM while also dishonoring the victims.

That being said, I make an attempt to understand where people are coming from who disagree. Look at what happened with Breonna Taylor. Within the cover of authority of the KY AG and "the law," an officer of the law can irresponsibly take an innocent's life inside their own home and the only consequence that he faces is essentially a charge for damaging the neighbors' walls. From that perspective, it seems contradictory and ineffective to protest from within the confines of law when your oppressor "bends" the law to support his prerogatives.
Click to expand...

Eh. Not a great example since the guy who fired blindly didn’t shoot anywhere in the room she was in, and she was standing next to her boyfriend who fired at police officers who had knocked to announce themselves to execute a warrant with her name on it.

Edit: Not sure if you’ve ever been in a gun fight but when you’re returning fire it’s hard not to hit someone who is standing right next to the dude shooting at you.

So since he didn’t actually kill her, he probably shouldn’t be charged. Or do we convict people for things they could have done? I mean he totally should be fired for sure. But should he be charged for murder when he didn’t kill anyone? Seems unreasonable.

Edit 2: also, I want to point out that the fact that all the families of these people have publicly denounced the violence and riots, yet their deaths are still being used to justify it is just further evidence that this whole thing has nothing to do with black lives.
 
trump's EC theft sounding less and less like a far-fetched plan each minute that goes by

 
Matthew9Thirtyfive said:
However, I do think there’s a difference between what the police are doing and what we do. Restraint is all well and good, but if someone is trying to stab or shoot you for pulling them over, that has to go out the window. They also don’t have the safety in numbers like we do. Many times it’s literally one cop. Maybe if more departments went to two cops per unit and had a policy of only contacting potentially dangerous people with more than one unit, we’d see less use of force.
Click to expand...
I was a corpsman. I wouldn’t trust the avg US police officer to have my back in that situation. I’m not saying their job isn’t dangerous, but I’ve been in situations where emotions were ridiculously high after say someone took some shots at us and went and hid amongst “civilians”. I also witnessed an utmost respect for human life in the homies as well.
 
NontradCA said:
Lol@ seeing stuff over social media. There’s your first mistake.
Click to expand...

Also yes, big mistake. I stopped going on Facebook after I got called racist for not making my profile picture a black square by people who have never done a single thing in their lives for the black community.
 
Matthew9Thirtyfive said:
Eh. Not a great example since the guy who fired blindly didn’t shoot anywhere in the room she was in, and she was standing next to her boyfriend who fired at police officers who had knocked to announce themselves to execute a warrant with her name on it.

Edit: Not sure if you’ve ever been in a gun fight but when you’re returning fire it’s hard not to hit someone who is standing right next to the dude shooting at you.

So since he didn’t actually kill her, he probably shouldn’t be charged. Or do we convict people for things they could have done? I mean he totally should be fired for sure. But should he be charged for murder when he didn’t kill anyone? Seems unreasonable.
Click to expand...

Wait, that makes it better that the person who actually shot her wasn't charged?

Multiple neighbors said there was no knock and no announcement. They had a no knock warrant. THE BOYFRIEND CALLED 911 TO REPORT PRESUMABLY UNIDENTIFIED INTRUDERS. You should reevaluate your usage of "unreasonable" if you think the detectives actually announced their presence.


"
The shots were fired inside Taylor's apartment, as well as from at least one officer who was outside and firing blind into the home, according to the family's lawsuit.

The person shooting from outside the home "could not see anything inside" because the living room window was obscured by curtains and the second bedroom window was obscured by a screen and blinds, the suit claims.

"There was no way that the officers could have had a reasonable line of sight when firing into the home from outside this window," it says.

Crump has said police shot rounds "from everywhere: from the front door, from the windows, from patio doors. I mean, it was a volley of bullets from every direction."

Redirect Notice

www.google.com
"

No, I've never been in a gunfight, but by the sound of it it seems like I'm about as well trained as these narcs who went full on spray and pray.
 
Last edited:
NontradCA said:
I was a corpsman. I wouldn’t trust the avg US police officer to have my back in that situation. I’m not saying their job isn’t dangerous, but I’ve been in situations where emotions were ridiculously high after say someone took some shots at us and went and hid amongst “civilians”. I also witnessed an utmost respect for human life in the homies as well.
Click to expand...

I wouldn’t either, because they aren’t trained for combat lol. I’ve seen the same kind of stuff. Not going to disagree that we are better trained.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

neuroride
Trying to reason increase in stipend to hospital...
2
Replies
66
Views
8K
DesiredMemberName?
DesiredMemberName?
BLADEMDA
Scotus 2023
2 3 4 5
Replies
244
Views
11K
pgg
pgg
C
POETIC JUSTICE
2
Replies
71
Views
3K
GravelRider
GravelRider
abolt18
Where Will Craig Kent Go Next?
Replies
6
Views
1K
abolt18
abolt18
nimbus
Other SCOTUS news
Replies
1
Views
706
deleted875186
D
Top