Discussion:
CT reality check
Add Reply
claviger
2018-08-09 23:07:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
An evil group of people who have no respect for Democracy plan to
assassinate President John F Kennedy on his trip to Dallas. One faction
agues a lone assassin is the best way to do this ambush during the parade
through downtown. One sniper at close range can put one or more shots on
target then escape immediately. Simple with minimal exposure to the
sniper and the gang that hired him. If something goes wrong much easier to
take care of with damage control. A very simple plan with minimum risk
using only minimum resources.

Other members in the group say no. The plan must include multiple snipers
with a designated patsy. OK, so one guy asks how many? One patsy and 20
snipers located around the plaza area. Why so many? To make sure the
President doesn't get lucky if the patsy misses. Is it even possible to
position that many snipers in that area? Yes. Won't those people in the
crowd hear so many shots? No, only the patsy has a normal rifle. Silencers
are bulky and extend the length of the rifle. Yes, but we think it's
worth the risk to do it that way. What if a few get caught running away
with a rifle? We think it worth the risk. What if all those snipers hit
the target and the body ends up with 20 bullet wounds? We don't care. Then
what is the point in having a patsy? As a diversion so the snipers can
get away. How do you move all the snipers in and out of the plaza without
somebody noticing? People are like cattle, they will panic and not
notice. What happens to the 20 snipers? We have 20 hitmen to take care of
them. What about the 20 hitmen? We have 20 more hitmen to take care of
them too. That sounds high risk costing a whole lot of money and some
might slip away and what if the target is lucky and all the snipers miss.
No problem we can place an insurance sniper up close behind a fence in the
parking lot. What if he screws up? He won't. How does he get away?
That is his problem. Seems like a lot of trouble, high risk, and money.
Why not simply hire the patsy and make sure he practices a lot before the
parade and a new firing range just opened outside the city limits.
Didn't know that. Why not hire a sniper to train him and see what he can
do. That punk was in the military so not that hard to get him ready for
such a close shot and a lot less money and risk. You makes sense.
Cancel those 20 snipers and get this punk ready for the big event.
mainframetech
2018-08-11 04:28:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
An evil group of people who have no respect for Democracy plan to
assassinate President John F Kennedy on his trip to Dallas. One faction
agues a lone assassin is the best way to do this ambush during the parade
through downtown. One sniper at close range can put one or more shots on
target then escape immediately. Simple with minimal exposure to the
sniper and the gang that hired him. If something goes wrong much easier to
take care of with damage control. A very simple plan with minimum risk
using only minimum resources.
Other members in the group say no. The plan must include multiple snipers
with a designated patsy. OK, so one guy asks how many? One patsy and 20
snipers located around the plaza area. Why so many? To make sure the
President doesn't get lucky if the patsy misses. Is it even possible to
position that many snipers in that area? Yes. Won't those people in the
crowd hear so many shots? No, only the patsy has a normal rifle. Silencers
are bulky and extend the length of the rifle. Yes, but we think it's
worth the risk to do it that way. What if a few get caught running away
with a rifle? We think it worth the risk. What if all those snipers hit
the target and the body ends up with 20 bullet wounds? We don't care. Then
what is the point in having a patsy? As a diversion so the snipers can
get away. How do you move all the snipers in and out of the plaza without
somebody noticing? People are like cattle, they will panic and not
notice. What happens to the 20 snipers? We have 20 hitmen to take care of
them. What about the 20 hitmen? We have 20 more hitmen to take care of
them too. That sounds high risk costing a whole lot of money and some
might slip away and what if the target is lucky and all the snipers miss.
No problem we can place an insurance sniper up close behind a fence in the
parking lot. What if he screws up? He won't. How does he get away?
That is his problem. Seems like a lot of trouble, high risk, and money.
Why not simply hire the patsy and make sure he practices a lot before the
parade and a new firing range just opened outside the city limits.
Didn't know that. Why not hire a sniper to train him and see what he can
do. That punk was in the military so not that hard to get him ready for
such a close shot and a lot less money and risk. You makes sense.
Cancel those 20 snipers and get this punk ready for the big event.
Another fiction novel. And there was never anyone that was dumb
enough to mention 20 shooters being used.

Chris
claviger
2018-08-13 05:58:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
An evil group of people who have no respect for Democracy plan to
assassinate President John F Kennedy on his trip to Dallas. One faction
agues a lone assassin is the best way to do this ambush during the parade
through downtown. One sniper at close range can put one or more shots on
target then escape immediately. Simple with minimal exposure to the
sniper and the gang that hired him. If something goes wrong much easier to
take care of with damage control. A very simple plan with minimum risk
using only minimum resources.
Other members in the group say no. The plan must include multiple snipers
with a designated patsy. OK, so one guy asks how many? One patsy and 20
snipers located around the plaza area. Why so many? To make sure the
President doesn't get lucky if the patsy misses. Is it even possible to
position that many snipers in that area? Yes. Won't those people in the
crowd hear so many shots? No, only the patsy has a normal rifle. Silencers
are bulky and extend the length of the rifle. Yes, but we think it's
worth the risk to do it that way. What if a few get caught running away
with a rifle? We think it worth the risk. What if all those snipers hit
the target and the body ends up with 20 bullet wounds? We don't care. Then
what is the point in having a patsy? As a diversion so the snipers can
get away. How do you move all the snipers in and out of the plaza without
somebody noticing? People are like cattle, they will panic and not
notice. What happens to the 20 snipers? We have 20 hitmen to take care of
them. What about the 20 hitmen? We have 20 more hitmen to take care of
them too. That sounds high risk costing a whole lot of money and some
might slip away and what if the target is lucky and all the snipers miss.
No problem we can place an insurance sniper up close behind a fence in the
parking lot. What if he screws up? He won't. How does he get away?
That is his problem. Seems like a lot of trouble, high risk, and money.
Why not simply hire the patsy and make sure he practices a lot before the
parade and a new firing range just opened outside the city limits.
Didn't know that. Why not hire a sniper to train him and see what he can
do. That punk was in the military so not that hard to get him ready for
such a close shot and a lot less money and risk. You makes sense.
Cancel those 20 snipers and get this punk ready for the big event.
Another fiction novel. And there was never anyone that was dumb
enough to mention 20 shooters being used.
Chris
You have a short memory.
mainframetech
2018-08-14 01:07:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by mainframetech
Post by claviger
An evil group of people who have no respect for Democracy plan to
assassinate President John F Kennedy on his trip to Dallas. One faction
agues a lone assassin is the best way to do this ambush during the parade
through downtown. One sniper at close range can put one or more shots on
target then escape immediately. Simple with minimal exposure to the
sniper and the gang that hired him. If something goes wrong much easier to
take care of with damage control. A very simple plan with minimum risk
using only minimum resources.
Other members in the group say no. The plan must include multiple snipers
with a designated patsy. OK, so one guy asks how many? One patsy and 20
snipers located around the plaza area. Why so many? To make sure the
President doesn't get lucky if the patsy misses. Is it even possible to
position that many snipers in that area? Yes. Won't those people in the
crowd hear so many shots? No, only the patsy has a normal rifle. Silencers
are bulky and extend the length of the rifle. Yes, but we think it's
worth the risk to do it that way. What if a few get caught running away
with a rifle? We think it worth the risk. What if all those snipers hit
the target and the body ends up with 20 bullet wounds? We don't care. Then
what is the point in having a patsy? As a diversion so the snipers can
get away. How do you move all the snipers in and out of the plaza without
somebody noticing? People are like cattle, they will panic and not
notice. What happens to the 20 snipers? We have 20 hitmen to take care of
them. What about the 20 hitmen? We have 20 more hitmen to take care of
them too. That sounds high risk costing a whole lot of money and some
might slip away and what if the target is lucky and all the snipers miss.
No problem we can place an insurance sniper up close behind a fence in the
parking lot. What if he screws up? He won't. How does he get away?
That is his problem. Seems like a lot of trouble, high risk, and money.
Why not simply hire the patsy and make sure he practices a lot before the
parade and a new firing range just opened outside the city limits.
Didn't know that. Why not hire a sniper to train him and see what he can
do. That punk was in the military so not that hard to get him ready for
such a close shot and a lot less money and risk. You makes sense.
Cancel those 20 snipers and get this punk ready for the big event.
Another fiction novel. And there was never anyone that was dumb
enough to mention 20 shooters being used.
Chris
You have a short memory.
If you're going to attempt to pretend that *I* said there were 30
shooters, better go back and look again. I've said in the past that there
were about 20 plotters up front, and 30 at the back end, but I've also
stated at those time that the Mafia supplied the shooters. That
eliminates the 20 being shooters.

I'm guessing that you thought as usual incorrectly that I meant 20
shooters, and can't get away from that number rattling around in your
head.

Chris
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-12 16:10:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
An evil group of people who have no respect for Democracy plan to
assassinate President John F Kennedy on his trip to Dallas. One faction
agues a lone assassin is the best way to do this ambush during the parade
through downtown. One sniper at close range can put one or more shots on
target then escape immediately. Simple with minimal exposure to the
sniper and the gang that hired him. If something goes wrong much easier to
take care of with damage control. A very simple plan with minimum risk
using only minimum resources.
Other members in the group say no. The plan must include multiple snipers
with a designated patsy. OK, so one guy asks how many? One patsy and 20
snipers located around the plaza area. Why so many? To make sure the
President doesn't get lucky if the patsy misses. Is it even possible to
position that many snipers in that area? Yes. Won't those people in the
crowd hear so many shots? No, only the patsy has a normal rifle. Silencers
are bulky and extend the length of the rifle. Yes, but we think it's
worth the risk to do it that way. What if a few get caught running away
with a rifle? We think it worth the risk. What if all those snipers hit
the target and the body ends up with 20 bullet wounds? We don't care. Then
what is the point in having a patsy? As a diversion so the snipers can
get away. How do you move all the snipers in and out of the plaza without
somebody noticing? People are like cattle, they will panic and not
notice. What happens to the 20 snipers? We have 20 hitmen to take care of
them. What about the 20 hitmen? We have 20 more hitmen to take care of
them too. That sounds high risk costing a whole lot of money and some
might slip away and what if the target is lucky and all the snipers miss.
No problem we can place an insurance sniper up close behind a fence in the
parking lot. What if he screws up? He won't. How does he get away?
That is his problem. Seems like a lot of trouble, high risk, and money.
Why not simply hire the patsy and make sure he practices a lot before the
parade and a new firing range just opened outside the city limits.
Didn't know that. Why not hire a sniper to train him and see what he can
do. That punk was in the military so not that hard to get him ready for
such a close shot and a lot less money and risk. You makes sense.
Cancel those 20 snipers and get this punk ready for the big event.
You mean the punk who missed a seated target only 120 feet away?
claviger
2018-08-23 01:51:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Cancel those 20 snipers and get this punk ready for the big event.
You mean the punk who missed a seated target only 120 feet away?
Yes, then put the next shot on center target from even further away.
The human target he was aiming at was identical to the silhouette
he practiced on for quals in the USMC.
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-24 02:42:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Cancel those 20 snipers and get this punk ready for the big event.
You mean the punk who missed a seated target only 120 feet away?
Yes, then put the next shot on center target from even further away.
The human target he was aiming at was identical to the silhouette
he practiced on for quals in the USMC.
So you can't even admit that Oswald missed Walker at only 120 feet away?
You know nothing about guns.
It was because the TSBD shot missed that the grassy knoll shooter had to
fire the insurance shot.

AGAIN, do you know what Maggie's Drawers means?
claviger
2018-08-24 18:39:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Cancel those 20 snipers and get this punk ready for the big event.
You mean the punk who missed a seated target only 120 feet away?
Yes, then put the next shot on center target from even further away.
The human target he was aiming at was identical to the silhouette
he practiced on for quals in the USMC.
So you can't even admit that Oswald missed Walker at only 120 feet away?
I don't need to admit it, because it is a fact. You don't seem to grasp
the concept of what a fact is all about. There are other facts you can't
deal with either.
Post by Anthony Marsh
You know nothing about guns.
It is obvious you have never been hunting.
Post by Anthony Marsh
It was because the TSBD shot missed that the grassy knoll
shooter had to fire the insurance shot.
Tell us more about that phantom sniper. Was the shooter male
or female? What was he/she wearing? What kind of weapon?
What happened to the weapon after the shot was fired? What
was the exit strategy? After all these years you never answered
all these questions.
Post by Anthony Marsh
AGAIN, do you know what Maggie's Drawers means?
Isn't that brand you wear every day?
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-25 13:05:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Cancel those 20 snipers and get this punk ready for the big event.
You mean the punk who missed a seated target only 120 feet away?
Yes, then put the next shot on center target from even further away.
The human target he was aiming at was identical to the silhouette
he practiced on for quals in the USMC.
So you can't even admit that Oswald missed Walker at only 120 feet away?
I don't need to admit it, because it is a fact. You don't seem to grasp
the concept of what a fact is all about. There are other facts you can't
deal with either.
Post by Anthony Marsh
You know nothing about guns.
It is obvious you have never been hunting.
FYI, one does not have to hunt to know how to use a gun.
WHat do you hunt with your Carcano? Butterflies?
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
It was because the TSBD shot missed that the grassy knoll
shooter had to fire the insurance shot.
Tell us more about that phantom sniper. Was the shooter male
You can see his head above the fence in the Moorman photo.

Loading Image...
Post by claviger
or female? What was he/she wearing? What kind of weapon?
He was using a Carcano similar to Oswald's.


He passed his rifle off to his spotter then pretended to be a SS agent
to blend in. We've been over this thousands of times, but you never pay
attention.
Post by claviger
What happened to the weapon after the shot was fired? What
was the exit strategy? After all these years you never answered
all these questions.
False. I've answered them thousands of times.
Your only trick he is to make false claims.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
AGAIN, do you know what Maggie's Drawers means?
Isn't that brand you wear every day?
Are you trying to prove that you don't know?
claviger
2018-08-26 23:12:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Cancel those 20 snipers and get this punk ready for the big event.
You mean the punk who missed a seated target only 120 feet away?
Yes, then put the next shot on center target from even further away.
The human target he was aiming at was identical to the silhouette
he practiced on for quals in the USMC.
So you can't even admit that Oswald missed Walker at only 120 feet away?
I don't need to admit it, because it is a fact. You don't seem to grasp
the concept of what a fact is all about. There are other facts you can't
deal with either.
Post by Anthony Marsh
You know nothing about guns.
It is obvious you have never been hunting.
FYI, one does not have to hunt to know how to use a gun.
WHat do you hunt with your Carcano? Butterflies?
I used to but they were too easy, so I switched to bumble bees.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
It was because the TSBD shot missed that the grassy knoll
shooter had to fire the insurance shot.
Tell us more about that phantom sniper. Was the shooter male
You can see his head above the fence in the Moorman photo.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/files/moor406.jpg
If that is a head where is the rifle? This is supposed to be at
the same instant of the head shot.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
or female? What was he/she wearing? What kind of weapon?
He was using a Carcano similar to Oswald's.
He passed his rifle off to his spotter then pretended to be a SS agent
to blend in.
The fake SSA was not dressed like a SSA.
Post by Anthony Marsh
We've been over this thousands of times, but you never
pay attention.
So how did the spotter get away carrying the rifle?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
What happened to the weapon after the shot was fired? What
was the exit strategy? After all these years you never answered
all these questions.
False. I've answered them thousands of times.
Your only trick he is to make false claims.
These simple questions obviously too hard for you.
bigdog
2018-08-27 18:00:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Cancel those 20 snipers and get this punk ready for the big event.
You mean the punk who missed a seated target only 120 feet away?
Yes, then put the next shot on center target from even further away.
The human target he was aiming at was identical to the silhouette
he practiced on for quals in the USMC.
So you can't even admit that Oswald missed Walker at only 120 feet away?
I don't need to admit it, because it is a fact. You don't seem to grasp
the concept of what a fact is all about. There are other facts you can't
deal with either.
Post by Anthony Marsh
You know nothing about guns.
It is obvious you have never been hunting.
FYI, one does not have to hunt to know how to use a gun.
WHat do you hunt with your Carcano? Butterflies?
I used to but they were too easy, so I switched to bumble bees.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
It was because the TSBD shot missed that the grassy knoll
shooter had to fire the insurance shot.
Tell us more about that phantom sniper. Was the shooter male
You can see his head above the fence in the Moorman photo.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/files/moor406.jpg
If that is a head where is the rifle? This is supposed to be at
the same instant of the head shot.
Don't ask logical questions. It confuses Marsh.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
or female? What was he/she wearing? What kind of weapon?
He was using a Carcano similar to Oswald's.
He passed his rifle off to his spotter then pretended to be a SS agent
to blend in.
The fake SSA was not dressed like a SSA.
I always love when CTs use the explanation that their GK shooter escaped
detection by passing off the rifle to an accomplice. So how did the
accomplice with the rifle escape detection?
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
We've been over this thousands of times, but you never
pay attention.
So how did the spotter get away carrying the rifle?
Oh, you beat me to it.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
What happened to the weapon after the shot was fired? What
was the exit strategy? After all these years you never answered
all these questions.
False. I've answered them thousands of times.
Your only trick he is to make false claims.
These simple questions obviously too hard for you.
They are way too logical.
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-28 03:56:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Cancel those 20 snipers and get this punk ready for the big event.
You mean the punk who missed a seated target only 120 feet away?
Yes, then put the next shot on center target from even further away.
The human target he was aiming at was identical to the silhouette
he practiced on for quals in the USMC.
So you can't even admit that Oswald missed Walker at only 120 feet away?
I don't need to admit it, because it is a fact. You don't seem to grasp
the concept of what a fact is all about. There are other facts you can't
deal with either.
Post by Anthony Marsh
You know nothing about guns.
It is obvious you have never been hunting.
FYI, one does not have to hunt to know how to use a gun.
WHat do you hunt with your Carcano? Butterflies?
I used to but they were too easy, so I switched to bumble bees.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
It was because the TSBD shot missed that the grassy knoll
shooter had to fire the insurance shot.
Tell us more about that phantom sniper. Was the shooter male
You can see his head above the fence in the Moorman photo.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/files/moor406.jpg
If that is a head where is the rifle? This is supposed to be at
the same instant of the head shot.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
or female? What was he/she wearing? What kind of weapon?
He was using a Carcano similar to Oswald's.
He passed his rifle off to his spotter then pretended to be a SS agent
to blend in.
The fake SSA was not dressed like a SSA.
He was wearing a suit. That's all you need to know.
Smith did not specify that it was Washington Black.

Mr. Smith.
I was checking all the bushes and I checked all the cars in the parking lot.
Mr. Liebeler.
There is a parking lot in behind this grassy area back from Elm Street
toward the railroad tracks, and you went down to the parking lot and
looked around?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir; I checked all the cars. I looked into all the cars and checked
around the bushes. Of course, I wasn't alone. There was some deputy
sheriff with me, and I believe one Secret Service man when I got there.
I got to make this statement, too. I felt awfully silly, but after the
shot and this woman, I pulled my pistol from my holster, and I thought,
this is silly, I don't know who I am looking for, and I put it back.
Just as I did, he showed me that he was a Secret Service agent.
Mr. Liebeler.
Did you accost this man?
Mr. Smith.
Well, he saw me coming with my pistol and right away he showed me who he
was.
Mr. Liebeler.
Do you remember who it was?
Mr. Smith.
No, sir; I don't--because then we started checking the cars. In fact, I
was checking the bushes, and I went through the cars, and I started over
here in this particular section.
Mr. Liebeler.
Down toward the railroad tracks where they go over the triple underpass?
Mr. Smith.
Yes.
Mr. Liebeler.
Did you have any basis for believing where the shots came from, or where
to look for somebody, other than what the lady told you?
Mr. Smith.
No, sir; except that maybe it was a power of suggestion. But it sounded
to me like they may have came from this vicinity here.
Mr. Liebeler.
Down around the---let's put a No. 5 there at the corner here behind this
concrete structure where the bushes were down toward the railroad tracks
from the Texas School Book Depository Building on the little street that
runs down in front of the Texas School Book Depository Building.
Mr. Smith.
Yes.
Mr. Liebeler.
Now you say that you had the idea that the shots may have come from up
in that area?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir; that is just what, well, like I say, the sound of it. That was
the most helpless and hopeless feeling I ever had.
Mr. Liebeler.
Well, you mentioned before there was an echo from the shots in the area.
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
Probably caused by the fact that there are some large buildings around
the area where the shots were fired from?
Mr. Smith.
Yes.
Mr. Liebeler.
Now did you at any time have occasion to look up to the railroad tracks
that went across the triple underpass?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir; I looked up there after I was going up to check there.
Mr. Liebeler.
You didn't have any occasion to 'look up there before you heard the shots?
Mr. Smith.
No, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
After you heard the shots, you proceeded down along the bushes here
between the street that runs in front of the Texas School Book
Depository Building and Elm Street to approximately point 5, and then
when you went down looking to the cars, you then had occasion to look up
at the railroad tracks running over the triple underpass?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
Did you see anybody up there?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir; there was two other officers there, I know.
Mr. Liebeler.
Were there any other people up there, that you can remember?
Mr. Smith.
No, sir; none that I remember.
Mr. Liebeler.
But you remember that there were two police officers up there?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
Now you searched these cars in this parking lot area down there by the
railroad tracks on from point 5 down toward the main railroad tracks
that cross over the triple underpass. Did you find anything that you
could associate in any way with the assassination?
Mr. Smith.
No, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
How long did you remain down in that area?
Mr. Smith.
Oh, I would say approximately 15 to 20 minutes.
Mr. Liebeler.
During that time, you continued searching through automobiles and
searching the general area in the parking lot back there; is that right?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
What did you do after you had searched this area?
Mr. Smith.
Well, it was, I don't remember whether this was a deputy sheriff--I
don't know his name he was in civilian clothes--he said they came from
the building up here. And by that time, of course, all the police around
there sealed the building off, and I went to the front door here on the,
well, you might say, the Houston Street side. I and Barnett, and we
sealed the front door and didn't let anyone in or out until he was
passed by the chief.
Mr. Liebeler.
Let me ask you this. Before you went up to the School Book Depository
Building, am I correct in understanding that you did thoroughly search
the area of the parking lot, you and the other officers?
Mr. Smith.
Well, now, I didn't go into all the cars. I looked into them, and I was
well satisfied in my mind that he wasn't around
Some of the cars were locked, and I just looked into all of them around
there, and I went back to the building.
Mr. Liebeler.
Who gave you instructions to go to the front door of that building, do
you remember?
Mr. Smith.
I believe it was Sergeant Howard.
Mr. Liebeler.
Sergeant Howard?
Mr. Smith.
Sergeant Howard, or Sergeant Harkness.
Mr. Liebeler.
So to the best of your recollection, it was one of those two men?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir. Wait---let's strike that. No; it wasn't. It was Chief Lumpkin
give us the direct order, I and Barnett, not to let anyone in or out of
that building; that's right--Deputy Chief Lumpkin.
Mr. Liebeler.
Where did you see him in order to receive that order?
Mr. Smith.
I started back up here to the building, and we were just about at the
front door when he contacted me and Barnett then.
Mr. Liebeler.
He instructed you and Barnett to stand at the front door and not let
anyone in or out?
Mr. Smith.
Right.
Mr. Liebeler.
Do you know approximately what time that was?
Mr. Smith.
No, sir; it must have been about 1. It was after I o'clock. I don't
remember; no.
Mr. Liebeler.
How long did you and Barnett remain there at the front door?
Mr. Smith.
Until about 2:30; I think I got off there.
Mr. Liebeler.
Did you at any time go into the building?
Mr. Smith.
No, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
Do you know whether other men were assigned to watch the back door?
Mr. Smith.
No, sir; I don't know. I am quite certain there was.
Mr. Liebeler.
But you had no personal knowledge of it at the time?
Mr. Smith.
No, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
Because you were assigned to the front door, and that is where you stayed?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
In fact, did you let anybody in or out of the building?
Mr. Smith.
Well, now, we let police officers in, of course, and firemen.
Mr. Liebeler.
The firemen came into the building?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir; there was something on that that they had to get some--- what
was that, I don't recall what it was that they come in there for now.
Mr. Liebeler.
There were some firemen from the Dallas Fire Department that went into
the building?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
Did they come back to the front door?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
How about Secret Service; were there any Secret Service agents around?
Mr. Smith.
I don't know, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
Do you know Agent Sorrels, the agent in charge of the Dallas office of
the Secret Service?
Mr. Smith.
I saw him a few minutes, but I don't know him personally.
Mr. Liebeler.
Do you remember seeing him around that day?
Mr. Smith.
No, sir; I don't remember.
Mr. Liebeler.
Did you at any time see Lee Harvey Oswald come in or out of the
building, or in the area at all?
Mr. Smith.
No, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
Is there anything that happened while you were standing there with
Barnett at the front door that you think would be of significance that
the Commission should know about that I haven't asked you about?
Mr. Smith.
No, sir; I don't.
Mr. Liebeler.
You just maintained the general guard duty there and only let the police
officers and fire department in, and you don't have any specific
recollection as to Secret Service agents. How about FBI agents; were
there some of those?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir; there were FBI agents.
Mr. Liebeler.
You let them go in?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
Do you remember any specific FBI agents that were there?
Mr. Smith.
No, sir; I don't remember any of the names.
Mr. Liebeler.
Who finally relieved you from that particular duty post?
Mr. Smith.
Let me think here a minute now. Chief Lumpkin, I know--I don't recall
who the officer was.
Mr. Liebeler.
I don't think it is of any particular importance if you can't recall.
What did you do after you were finally relieved?
Mr. Smith.
I don't know if this is of significance either, but they had set up, the
Salvation Army had some coffee and I had a cup of coffee and proceeded
on back to the Mercantile Bank. I had an extra job there that evening.
Mr. Liebeler.
You were relieved from your duty post?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
And went on about your own personal affairs?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
Did you conduct any additional investigation or have to do with the
investigation of the assassination after that?
Mr. Smith.
No, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
Did you know Officer Tippit?
Mr. Smith.
Remotely. I didn't know him real well. Just knew him when I saw him.
Mr. Liebeler.
When did you first hear about Oswald's capture?
Mr. Smith.
It was after I left my post.
Mr. Liebeler.
After you left your post?
Mr. Smith.
Yes; in fact, just before I got off from working at the bank. Just
before 6 o'clock. A squad of detectives, I don't recall their names, but
they told me they got a man over at the Texas Theatre that they thought
might have been the one.
Mr. Liebeler.
After you heard the shots and went from point 4 on Commission Exhibit
No. 354 down to point 5 searching the bushy area here, did you have any
occasion to look up in the windows of any of the buildings surrounding
the intersection of Elm and Houston Streets?
Mr. Smith.
No, sir; I was--pardon the expression--beating the bushes and checking
the cars.
Mr. Smith.
No sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
Are you familiar with the traffic patterns on these three streets here,
Commerce, Main, and Elm Streets, as they go down under the triple underpass?
Mr. Smith.
Yes sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
The motorcade came down Main Street from the east to intersection of
Main Street and Houston, did it not?
Mr. Smith.
Yes; headed west on Main.
Mr. Liebeler.
Yes; and it turned right on Houston Street and then turned left on Elm
and was headed toward the triple underpass when the assassination
occurred. What would have prevented the motorcade from going directly
down Main Street under the triple underpass, remembering now that the
motorcade wanted to go onto Stemmons Freeway?
Mr. Smith.
I don't know, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
Now, could you have gone straight down Main Street and gotten onto
Stemmons Freeway down here?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
Where the three streets go under the triple overpass, there is a
concrete barrier between Elm Street and Main Street; is there not?
Mr. Smith.
What do you mean?
Mr. Liebeler.
Where the streets actually go under the railroad tracks here.
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
Now where is the entrance as we go off, as we see the three streets
going off the picture here, Commission Exhibit No. 354? Where is the
entrance to the Stemmons Freeway?
Mr. Smith.
It is back off.
Mr. Liebeler.
It is not shown on the picture?
Mr. Smith.
No, sir; it is back off here.
Mr. Liebeler.
To go down Stemmons Expressway or Freeway towards the trade mart, you
would have to turn how? Would you turn to your right?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
Now could you have actually gone off to the right and crossed over Elm
Street if you had been on Main Street and gone under the triple underpass?
Mr. Smith.
They merge.
Mr. Liebeler.
They all merge together down there?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
So as far as you know, there was no reason why the motorcade couldn't
have gone straight down Elm Street and gone on to the Stemmons Freeway
headed for the trade mart?
Mr. Smith.
As far as I know, there is no reason.
Mr. Liebeler.
Is it possible that as you come down Main Street, if you stayed directly
on Main Street going under the triple underpass, that you might have
difficulty in making the turn with a big car from Main Street to go onto
Stem-mons Freeway?
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir.
Mr. Liebeler.
I don't think I have any more questions about the situation, unless you
can think of something else that you might have seen or observed that
day that I haven't asked you about, that you think the Commission should
know.
Mr. Smith.
Sir, I just can't think of anything else.
Mr. Liebeler.
I want to thank you very much for coming over. I appreciate your
cooperation.
Mr. Smith.
Yes, sir; thank you.
Source:
Warren Commission Hearings, Vol. VII, p. 531.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
We've been over this thousands of times, but you never
pay attention.
So how did the spotter get away carrying the rifle?
Walked to a car.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
What happened to the weapon after the shot was fired? What
was the exit strategy? After all these years you never answered
all these questions.
False. I've answered them thousands of times.
Your only trick he is to make false claims.
These simple questions obviously too hard for you.
I just answered them. Something wrong with your brain?
claviger
2018-08-29 01:55:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Tell us more about that phantom sniper. Was the shooter male
You can see his head above the fence in the Moorman photo.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/files/moor406.jpg
If that is a head where is the rifle? This is supposed to be at
the same instant of the head shot.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
or female? What was he/she wearing? What kind of weapon?
He was using a Carcano similar to Oswald's.
He passed his rifle off to his spotter then pretended
to be a SS agent to blend in.
The fake SSA was not dressed like a SSA.
He was wearing a suit. That's all you need to know.
Smith did not specify that it was Washington Black.
Officer Smith was also interviewed by journalist and author,
Anthony Summers. According to Summers, Smith described
the “Secret Service” agent he encountered as follows:

“He looked like an auto mechanic. He had on a sports shirt
and sports pants. But he had dirty fingernails, it looked like,
and hands that looked like an auto mechanic's hands. And
afterwards it didn't ring true for the Secret Service. At the
time we were so pressed for time, and we were searching.
And he had produced correct identification, and we just
overlooked the thing. I should have checked that man
closer, but at the time I didn't snap on it.”

This guy was dressed nothing like a SSA.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
We've been over this thousands of times, but you never
pay attention.
So how did the spotter get away carrying the rifle?
Walked to a car.
What did he do then, sit inside the car? Maybe he took
a nap or stretched out under the car for shade?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
What happened to the weapon after the shot was fired?
What was the exit strategy? After all these years you
never answered all these questions.
False. I've answered them thousands of times.
Your only trick he is to make false claims.
These simple questions obviously too hard for you.
I just answered them. Something wrong with your brain?
Yes, it craves facts but repels BS.
claviger
2018-08-30 03:31:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Officer Smith was also interviewed by journalist and author,
Anthony Summers. According to Summers, Smith described
“He looked like an auto mechanic. He had on a sports shirt
and sports pants. But he had dirty fingernails, it looked like,
and hands that looked like an auto mechanic's hands. And
afterwards it didn't ring true for the Secret Service. At the
time we were so pressed for time, and we were searching.
And he had produced correct identification, and we just
overlooked the thing. I should have checked that man
closer, but at the time I didn't snap on it.”
This guy was dressed nothing like a SSA.
I thought DPD Smith said he was wearing a sport coat but
this quote only mentions a sport shirt, so no place to hide
a weapon. Even more unlikely this person was a SSA or a
sniper.
claviger
2018-08-31 01:06:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by claviger
Officer Smith was also interviewed by journalist and author,
Anthony Summers. According to Summers, Smith described
“He looked like an auto mechanic. He had on a sports shirt
and sports pants. But he had dirty fingernails, it looked like,
and hands that looked like an auto mechanic's hands. And
afterwards it didn't ring true for the Secret Service. At the
time we were so pressed for time, and we were searching.
And he had produced correct identification, and we just
overlooked the thing. I should have checked that man
closer, but at the time I didn't snap on it.”
This guy was dressed nothing like a SSA.
I thought DPD Smith said he was wearing a sport coat but
this quote only mentions a sport shirt, so no place to hide
a weapon. Even more unlikely this person was a SSA or a
sniper.
"And he had produced correct identification, and we just
overlooked the thing."

Wonder what he means by "correct identification"? Who is "we"?
Evidently there was a Deputy Sheriff standing there watching this
confrontation. He was never identified. If DPD Smith thought the
guy was SSA why did he not ask for help as backup for searching
the area?
Anthony Marsh
2018-09-01 16:53:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by claviger
Post by claviger
Officer Smith was also interviewed by journalist and author,
Anthony Summers. According to Summers, Smith described
???He looked like an auto mechanic. He had on a sports shirt
and sports pants. But he had dirty fingernails, it looked like,
and hands that looked like an auto mechanic's hands. And
afterwards it didn't ring true for the Secret Service. At the
time we were so pressed for time, and we were searching.
And he had produced correct identification, and we just
overlooked the thing. I should have checked that man
closer, but at the time I didn't snap on it.???
This guy was dressed nothing like a SSA.
I thought DPD Smith said he was wearing a sport coat but
this quote only mentions a sport shirt, so no place to hide
a weapon. Even more unlikely this person was a SSA or a
sniper.
"And he had produced correct identification, and we just
overlooked the thing."
Wonder what he means by "correct identification"? Who is "we"?
Evidently there was a Deputy Sheriff standing there watching this
confrontation. He was never identified. If DPD Smith thought the
guy was SSA why did he not ask for help as backup for searching
the area?
He did. Read his testimony.

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.; and this woman came up to me and she was just in
hysterics. She told me, "They are shooting the President from the
bushes." So I immediately proceeded up here.
Mr. LIEBELER. You proceeded up to an area immediately behind the
concrete structure here that is described by Elm Street and the street
that runs immediately in front of the Texas School Book Depository, is
that right?
Mr. SMITH. I was checking all the bushes and I checked all the cars in
the parking lot.
Mr. LIEBELER. There is a parking lot in behind this grassy area back
from Elm Street toward the railroad tracks, and you went down to the
parking lot and looked around?
Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir; I checked all the cars. I looked into all the cars
and checked around the bushes. Of course, I wasn't alone. There was some
deputy sheriff with me, and I believe one Secret Service man when I got
there.
I got to make this statement, too. I felt awfully silly, but after the
shot and this woman, I pulled my pistol from my holster, and I thought,
this is silly, I don't know who I am looking for, and I put it back.
Just as I did, he showed me that he was a Secret Service agent.
Mr. LIEBELER. Did you accost this man?
Mr. SMITH. Well, he saw me coming with my pistol and right away he
showed me who he was.
Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember who it was?
Mr. SMITH. No, sir; I don't--because then we started checking the cars.
In fact, I was checking the bushes, and I went through the cars, and I
started over here in this particular section.
Mr. LIEBELER. Down toward the railroad tracks where they go over the
triple underpass?
Mr. SMITH. Yes.
Mr.
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-31 01:13:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by claviger
Officer Smith was also interviewed by journalist and author,
Anthony Summers. According to Summers, Smith described
???He looked like an auto mechanic. He had on a sports shirt
and sports pants. But he had dirty fingernails, it looked like,
and hands that looked like an auto mechanic's hands. And
afterwards it didn't ring true for the Secret Service. At the
time we were so pressed for time, and we were searching.
And he had produced correct identification, and we just
overlooked the thing. I should have checked that man
closer, but at the time I didn't snap on it.???
This guy was dressed nothing like a SSA.
I thought DPD Smith said he was wearing a sport coat but
this quote only mentions a sport shirt, so no place to hide
a weapon. Even more unlikely this person was a SSA or a
sniper.
A real SSA hides his gun so that the public doesn't see it.
Are you talking about a rifle? How did Oswald hide his rifle so that
Baker didn't see it. You are childish.
claviger
2018-09-01 01:20:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by claviger
Officer Smith was also interviewed by journalist and author,
Anthony Summers. According to Summers, Smith described
???He looked like an auto mechanic. He had on a sports shirt
and sports pants. But he had dirty fingernails, it looked like,
and hands that looked like an auto mechanic's hands. And
afterwards it didn't ring true for the Secret Service. At the
time we were so pressed for time, and we were searching.
And he had produced correct identification, and we just
overlooked the thing. I should have checked that man
closer, but at the time I didn't snap on it.???
This guy was dressed nothing like a SSA.
I thought DPD Smith said he was wearing a sport coat but
this quote only mentions a sport shirt, so no place to hide
a weapon. Even more unlikely this person was a SSA or a
sniper.
A real SSA hides his gun so that the public doesn't see it.
The reason they wear suits.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Are you talking about a rifle?
Are you talking about a pistol, zip gun, or bazooka?
Post by Anthony Marsh
How did Oswald hide his rifle so that Baker didn't see it.
You don't know?!!!
Post by Anthony Marsh
You are childish.
You are very weird.
Anthony Marsh
2018-09-02 18:21:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by claviger
Officer Smith was also interviewed by journalist and author,
Anthony Summers. According to Summers, Smith described
???He looked like an auto mechanic. He had on a sports shirt
and sports pants. But he had dirty fingernails, it looked like,
and hands that looked like an auto mechanic's hands. And
afterwards it didn't ring true for the Secret Service. At the
time we were so pressed for time, and we were searching.
And he had produced correct identification, and we just
overlooked the thing. I should have checked that man
closer, but at the time I didn't snap on it.???
This guy was dressed nothing like a SSA.
I thought DPD Smith said he was wearing a sport coat but
this quote only mentions a sport shirt, so no place to hide
a weapon. Even more unlikely this person was a SSA or a
sniper.
A real SSA hides his gun so that the public doesn't see it.
The reason they wear suits.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Are you talking about a rifle?
No, silly. They can hide guns in other places. While on protective duty
they had to wear suits.
Post by claviger
Are you talking about a pistol, zip gun, or bazooka?
The real Secret Service used revolvers back then. Never zip guns unless
undercover. Neve bazookas in public. I prefer not to say pistol because
you might get confused.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
How did Oswald hide his rifle so that Baker didn't see it.
You don't know?!!!
Post by Anthony Marsh
You are childish.
You are very weird.
claviger
2018-08-29 01:57:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
He was using a Carcano similar to Oswald's.
He passed his rifle off to his spotter then pretended
to be a SS agent to blend in.
The fake SSA was not dressed like a SSA.
He was wearing a suit. That's all you need to know.
Smith did not specify that it was Washington Black.
The guy Smith thought was a SSA was not wearing a suit.
He was wearing a sport coat, slacks, and no tie. If he was
standing among real SSA he would standout immediately
as not in conformation with SSA proper appearance. Suits
were their official uniform when they traveled, and several
other people that day carried ID Badges, including some
News reporters.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
We've been over this thousands of times, but you
never pay attention.
So how did the spotter get away carrying the rifle?
Walked to a car.
Why didn't anyone see him? His movements with a rifle in
hand should immediately attract attention, especially from
RR employees in this two story RR Tower overlooking this
official parking lot. It was part of Lee Bowers' job to watch
the parking area, especially during this important parade.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
What happened to the weapon after the shot was
fired? What was the exit strategy? After all these
years you never answered all these questions.
False. I've answered them thousands of times.
Your only trick he is to make false claims.
These simple questions obviously too hard for you.
I just answered them. Something wrong with your brain?
Yes, my poor little brain knows the difference between Evidence
from Malarky. So It immediately let's me know when someone is
malarking with known evidence. You have been busted again!
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-30 15:03:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
He was using a Carcano similar to Oswald's.
He passed his rifle off to his spotter then pretended
to be a SS agent to blend in.
The fake SSA was not dressed like a SSA.
He was wearing a suit. That's all you need to know.
Smith did not specify that it was Washington Black.
The guy Smith thought was a SSA was not wearing a suit.
He was wearing a sport coat, slacks, and no tie. If he was
standing among real SSA he would standout immediately
as not in conformation with SSA proper appearance. Suits
were their official uniform when they traveled, and several
other people that day carried ID Badges, including some
News reporters.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
We've been over this thousands of times, but you
never pay attention.
So how did the spotter get away carrying the rifle?
Walked to a car.
Why didn't anyone see him? His movements with a rifle in
So what if someone saw him. No one saw Oswald.
Maybe Ed hoffman saw him. You can't expect hundeds to see him.
No one saw Black Dog Man only a few feet way.
Post by claviger
hand should immediately attract attention, especially from
RR employees in this two story RR Tower overlooking this
official parking lot. It was part of Lee Bowers' job to watch
the parking area, especially during this important parade.
They saw people walking aroun near the fence.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
What happened to the weapon after the shot was
fired? What was the exit strategy? After all these
years you never answered all these questions.
False. I've answered them thousands of times.
Your only trick he is to make false claims.
These simple questions obviously too hard for you.
I just answered them. Something wrong with your brain?
Yes, my poor little brain knows the difference between Evidence
from Malarky. So It immediately let's me know when someone is
malarking with known evidence. You have been busted again!
claviger
2018-08-31 02:33:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
He was using a Carcano similar to Oswald's.
He passed his rifle off to his spotter then pretended
to be a SS agent to blend in.
The fake SSA was not dressed like a SSA.
He was wearing a suit. That's all you need to know.
Smith did not specify that it was Washington Black.
The guy Smith thought was a SSA was not wearing a suit.
He was wearing a sport coat, slacks, and no tie. If he was
standing among real SSA he would standout immediately
as not in conformation with SSA proper appearance. Suits
were their official uniform when they traveled, and several
other people that day carried ID Badges, including some
News reporters.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
We've been over this thousands of times, but you
never pay attention.
So how did the spotter get away carrying the rifle?
Walked to a car.
Why didn't anyone see him? His movements with a rifle in
So what if someone saw him.
With rifle in hand?
Post by Anthony Marsh
No one saw Oswald.
Witnesses saw a guy shooting a rifle from the 6th floor window.
The rifle found on the 6th floor belonged to LHO. No other rifle
was found inside the TSBD building. After seeing his boss in the
lunchroom LHO disappeared from TSBD and took a bus then a
cab home. If he didn't shoot his rifle from the 6th floor window
then who did? If LHO was innocent why leave the safety of the
TSBD with cops all around to protect him?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Maybe Ed hoffman saw him. You can't expect hundeds to see
him. No one saw Black Dog Man only a few feet way.
Post by claviger
hand should immediately attract attention, especially from
RR employees in this two story RR Tower overlooking this
official parking lot. It was part of Lee Bowers' job to watch
the parking area, especially during this important parade.
They saw people walking around near the fence.
Who is "they"?
Anthony Marsh
2018-09-01 16:54:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
He was using a Carcano similar to Oswald's.
He passed his rifle off to his spotter then pretended
to be a SS agent to blend in.
The fake SSA was not dressed like a SSA.
He was wearing a suit. That's all you need to know.
Smith did not specify that it was Washington Black.
The guy Smith thought was a SSA was not wearing a suit.
He was wearing a sport coat, slacks, and no tie. If he was
standing among real SSA he would standout immediately
as not in conformation with SSA proper appearance. Suits
were their official uniform when they traveled, and several
other people that day carried ID Badges, including some
News reporters.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
We've been over this thousands of times, but you
never pay attention.
So how did the spotter get away carrying the rifle?
Walked to a car.
Why didn't anyone see him? His movements with a rifle in
So what if someone saw him.
With rifle in hand?
Doesn't have to be in hand. Some witnesses say it was in a tool box.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
No one saw Oswald.
Witnesses saw a guy shooting a rifle from the 6th floor window.
Doesn't have to be Oswald. You are begging the question.
Post by claviger
The rifle found on the 6th floor belonged to LHO. No other rifle
was found inside the TSBD building. After seeing his boss in the
Yeah, I said his rifle was used. We don't know who used it.
Post by claviger
lunchroom LHO disappeared from TSBD and took a bus then a
cab home. If he didn't shoot his rifle from the 6th floor window
then who did? If LHO was innocent why leave the safety of the
TSBD with cops all around to protect him?
Oswald was not safe. A cop pointed a gun at him. Maybe he figured out
that someone had framed him.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Maybe Ed hoffman saw him. You can't expect hundeds to see
him. No one saw Black Dog Man only a few feet way.
Post by claviger
hand should immediately attract attention, especially from
RR employees in this two story RR Tower overlooking this
official parking lot. It was part of Lee Bowers' job to watch
the parking area, especially during this important parade.
They saw people walking around near the fence.
Who is "they"?
Law enforcement. Spectators.
claviger
2018-09-01 16:57:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
If LHO was tricked into bringing his rifle to work then he knew
who the trickster was. He could have alerted the police and
asked for immediate protection of his wife and children. This
is all fantasy because LHO had a big ego and wanted to be a
deadly sniper like his heroes Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.
Anthony Marsh
2018-09-02 18:21:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
If LHO was tricked into bringing his rifle to work then he knew
who the trickster was. He could have alerted the police and
asked for immediate protection of his wife and children. This
is all fantasy because LHO had a big ego and wanted to be a
deadly sniper like his heroes Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.
Are you really that naive or are you just joking?

You want the suspect to voluntary go to the police who are famous for
beating confessions out of innocent people? Frazier went in to talk to
Fritz and Fritz typed up a phony confession and told him to sign it or else.
You've lead a sheltered life.
claviger
2018-09-04 00:06:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
If LHO was tricked into bringing his rifle to work then he knew
who the trickster was. He could have alerted the police and
asked for immediate protection of his wife and children. This
is all fantasy because LHO had a big ego and wanted to be a
deadly sniper like his heroes Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.
Are you really that naive or are you just joking?
You want the suspect to voluntary go to the police who are famous for
beating confessions out of innocent people? Frazier went in to talk to
Fritz and Fritz typed up a phony confession and told him to sign it or else.
You've lead a sheltered life.
If he was innocent and could lead the police to the guy who tricked him
yes that would be the proactive thing to do, unless he was part of the
conspiracy. Where was LHO standing that day watching the parade if
not in the 6th floor window?
Anthony Marsh
2018-09-05 01:12:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
If LHO was tricked into bringing his rifle to work then he knew
who the trickster was. He could have alerted the police and
asked for immediate protection of his wife and children. This
is all fantasy because LHO had a big ego and wanted to be a
deadly sniper like his heroes Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.
Are you really that naive or are you just joking?
You want the suspect to voluntary go to the police who are famous for
beating confessions out of innocent people? Frazier went in to talk to
Fritz and Fritz typed up a phony confession and told him to sign it or else.
You've lead a sheltered life.
If he was innocent and could lead the police to the guy who tricked him
yes that would be the proactive thing to do, unless he was part of the
conspiracy. Where was LHO standing that day watching the parade if
not in the 6th floor window?
Silly. He tried Cooperating with the police and the first thing he saw
was a cop pointing a gun at his stomach.

Or do you mean cooperating as in all those black men when they raised
their hands and said DON'T SHOOT just before they got shot in the back
27 times by a white cop?
claviger
2018-09-05 20:55:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
If LHO was tricked into bringing his rifle to work then he knew
who the trickster was. He could have alerted the police and
asked for immediate protection of his wife and children. This
is all fantasy because LHO had a big ego and wanted to be a
deadly sniper like his heroes Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.
Are you really that naive or are you just joking?
You want the suspect to voluntary go to the police who are famous for
beating confessions out of innocent people? Frazier went in to talk to
Fritz and Fritz typed up a phony confession and told him to sign it or else.
You've lead a sheltered life.
If he was innocent and could lead the police to the guy who tricked him
yes that would be the proactive thing to do, unless he was part of the
conspiracy. Where was LHO standing that day watching the parade if
not in the 6th floor window?
Silly. He tried Cooperating with the police and the first thing he saw
was a cop pointing a gun at his stomach.
How did he cooperate with Police? He broke the Law by shooting at the
President in a parade. Didn't seem to bother him Jackie was sitting just
inches away and had to endure the horror of seeing her husband's brains
explode.

If LHO wanted to cooperate he should have volunteered to go with his Boss
and the Police Officer upstairs to search the upper floors. Instead he
abandoned his job and went home to get a pistol. Your excuse is he was
trying to go back to the TSBD and shoot the sniper. Instead he shot a
neighborhood patrol officer who tried to talk with him. Why did he not ask
that Policeman for a ride back to the TSBD building?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Or do you mean cooperating as in all those black men when they raised
their hands and said DON'T SHOOT just before they got shot in the back
27 times by a white cop?
What kind of pistol has 27 bullets? I've not heard about that one. Why
are you so anti Police? Do them a favor if somebody breaks into your apt
or mugs you on the street don't call the Blue Meanies, call Code Pink
instead.
Anthony Marsh
2018-09-07 00:25:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
If LHO was tricked into bringing his rifle to work then he knew
who the trickster was. He could have alerted the police and
asked for immediate protection of his wife and children. This
is all fantasy because LHO had a big ego and wanted to be a
deadly sniper like his heroes Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.
Are you really that naive or are you just joking?
You want the suspect to voluntary go to the police who are famous for
beating confessions out of innocent people? Frazier went in to talk to
Fritz and Fritz typed up a phony confession and told him to sign it or else.
You've lead a sheltered life.
If he was innocent and could lead the police to the guy who tricked him
yes that would be the proactive thing to do, unless he was part of the
conspiracy. Where was LHO standing that day watching the parade if
not in the 6th floor window?
Silly. He tried Cooperating with the police and the first thing he saw
was a cop pointing a gun at his stomach.
How did he cooperate with Police? He broke the Law by shooting at the
You ASSuME whar you haven't proved. Even a murder can cooperate with the
police and some criminals never cooperate with the police.
Post by claviger
President in a parade. Didn't seem to bother him Jackie was sitting just
inches away and had to endure the horror of seeing her husband's brains
explode.
You convict prople without a trial.
Post by claviger
If LHO wanted to cooperate he should have volunteered to go with his Boss
and the Police Officer upstairs to search the upper floors. Instead he
abandoned his job and went home to get a pistol. Your excuse is he was
trying to go back to the TSBD and shoot the sniper. Instead he shot a
neighborhood patrol officer who tried to talk with him. Why did he not ask
that Policeman for a ride back to the TSBD building?
What are you babbling about. Don't try to put words omn my mpouth.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Or do you mean cooperating as in all those black men when they raised
their hands and said DON'T SHOOT just before they got shot in the back
27 times by a white cop?
What kind of pistol has 27 bullets? I've not heard about that one. Why
You are not allowed to and I did not speficy just one clip.
Post by claviger
are you so anti Police? Do them a favor if somebody breaks into your apt
Silly. I always support good cops. I played in the Boston Police Band. In
one of our neigboring cities, the cops were the ones who robbed the bank
and killed a co-conspirator. In my city the Mayor's cousin was a cop and
also one of the biggest drug dealers.
Post by claviger
or mugs you on the street don't call the Blue Meanies, call Code Pink
instead.
Return-Path: <***@comcast.net>
X-Original-To: ***@panix.com
Delivered-To: ***@panix.com
Received: from mail2.panix.com (mail2.panix.com [166.84.1.73])
by mailbackend.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF97130D4D
for <***@panix.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 17:34:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from euclid.mscs.mu.edu (euclid.mscs.mu.edu [134.48.4.5])
by mail2.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88BE31F082
for <***@panix.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 17:34:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (qmail 344 invoked from network); 5 Sep 2018 21:34:23 -0000
Received: from mcadams.posc.mu.edu ([134.48.30.18])
(envelope-sender <***@comcast.net>)
by euclid.mscs.mu.edu (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
for <***@panix.com>; 5 Sep 2018 21:34:23 -0000
To: ***@panix.com
Subject: Re: 60s technology no match for today's
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
References: <f651252f-c7d4-4a72-8266-***@googlegroups.com>
<ba57a7bd-1fbf-4339-b833-***@googlegroups.com>
<7fa556b1-f0aa-4410-af11-***@googlegroups.com>
<52ad0834-9720-47af-bd97-***@googlegroups.com>
<***@4ax.com>
<93e05f66-86ae-4769-977f-***@googlegroups.com>
<a2eb8e7d-de13-432a-9765-***@googlegroups.com>
<0d4dcb5e-b2ea-45eb-bed7-***@googlegroups.com>
<***@4ax.com>
<9ba46bfc-d7e4-4274-8b01-***@googlegroups.com>
From: Anthony Marsh <***@comcast.net>
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2018 17:34:18 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/60.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <9ba46bfc-d7e4-4274-8b01-***@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Path:
NNTP-Posting-Host: 73.149.130.198
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 73.149.130.198
Message-ID: <5b904bda$***@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>
X-Trace: mcadams.posc.mu.edu 1536183258 73.149.130.198 (5 Sep 2018 16:34:18 -0500)
X-Original-Trace: 5 Sep 2018 16:34:18 -0500, 73.149.130.198
Lines: 69
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Trump's success has been due largely to his outrageousness. Why would he
change now? It keeps his base energized.
Don't you consider that a sad statement, though? I'm not sure how you
intended your above comment to be interpreted. Are you saying that this is
a GOOD thing that Trump does to energize his base - being outrageous?
It might be politically expedient, but it's a sad commentary on the
character of Trump's base that they feed off his outrageousness.
No, it's a sad commentary on Hillary and the Democratic Party that
they have abandoned the working class, such that Hillary was seen by
them as a better alternative to Trump.
Remember the "bitter clingers?" What did you think of that comment
from Obama?
Remember "basket of deplorables?" Actually, you *agreed* with that.
Remember "What's the Matter With Kansas?"
What do you think of Hillary's comments in India?


When a party makes it clear they *hate* you, are you going to vote for
them?
Post by claviger
I would
think America would prefer (and deserves) a more measured, calming
influence on the nation instead of feeling the need to rile his "base"
with dog whistles
The notion "dog whistles" is a sleazy tactic liberals use to claim
that somebody who didn't *say* anything racist, really *did* say
something racist.
That's because liberals can't believe that anybody who isn't racist
could possibly disagree with them. Oppose illegal immigration? You
must be racist. Don't like NFL players taking a knee? You must be
racist.
It shows the intolerance of liberals that they can't actually engage
arguments. They just shout "racism."
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
The height of hypocrisy was Bill Clinton claiming that the slogan Make
America Great Again was a racist dog whistle. He used those exact words in
Wow, he said something similar in a speech. Most polititicians do.
SHow me the hats Clinton sold with that slogan on them.
Apples and Oranges.
Post by claviger
announcing his candidacy for President and did it again in support of
Hillary in 2008. It's OK for him to use those words but it is racism when
Trump did.
claviger
2018-09-09 00:22:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
If LHO was tricked into bringing his rifle to work then he knew
who the trickster was. He could have alerted the police and
asked for immediate protection of his wife and children. This
is all fantasy because LHO had a big ego and wanted to be a
deadly sniper like his heroes Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.
Are you really that naive or are you just joking?
You want the suspect to voluntary go to the police who are famous for
beating confessions out of innocent people? Frazier went in to talk to
Fritz and Fritz typed up a phony confession and told him to sign it or else.
You've lead a sheltered life.
If he was innocent and could lead the police to the guy who tricked him
yes that would be the proactive thing to do, unless he was part of the
conspiracy. Where was LHO standing that day watching the parade if
not in the 6th floor window?
Silly. He tried Cooperating with the police and the first thing he saw
was a cop pointing a gun at his stomach.
How did he cooperate with Police? He broke the Law by shooting at the
You ASSuME whar you haven't proved. Even a murder can cooperate with
the police and some criminals never cooperate with the police.
So how did LHO cooperate with the Dallas Police Department?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
President in a parade. Didn't seem to bother him Jackie was sitting just
inches away and had to endure the horror of seeing her husband's brains
explode.
You convict prople without a trial.
This Newsgroup is a never-ending ongoing trial of sniper and cop killer
LHO.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
If LHO wanted to cooperate he should have volunteered to go with his Boss
and the Police Officer upstairs to search the upper floors. Instead he
abandoned his job and went home to get a pistol. Your excuse is he was
trying to go back to the TSBD and shoot the sniper. Instead he shot a
neighborhood patrol officer who tried to talk with him. Why did he not ask
that Policeman for a ride back to the TSBD building?
What are you babbling about. Don't try to put words omn my mpouth.
So why did LHO not cooperate with a neighborhood DPD patrolman who
stopped to ask him some questions? Why did he shoot this DPD officer
as he got out of his marked Patrol Car?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Or do you mean cooperating as in all those black men when they raised
their hands and said DON'T SHOOT just before they got shot in the back
27 times by a white cop?
What kind of pistol has 27 bullets? I've not heard about that one.
You are not allowed to and I did not speficy just one clip.
What kind of automatic pistol are you referring to?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
are you so anti Police? Do them a favor if somebody breaks into your apt
Silly. I always support good cops.
Good cops sometimes are forced to shoot suspects who do not follow clear
instructions to ceases and desist, who instead resist arrest by attacking
the police officer responding to a request for help from a victim.
Police Officers have the right to self defense from criminal threat of
violence. The police officer is not there to be a spectator watching
someone like you trying to defend your wallet and person from bodily harm.

Any police officer is expected to immediately take control of the
situation not wait to see who wins the wrestling contest. Not all police
officers are built like The Incredible Hulk, so must carry batons, mace,
and a sidearm. Not all of them get to have a taser. Using tools they do
have available they are expected to defend you from a criminal threat you
can't handle.
Post by Anthony Marsh
I played in the Boston Police Band.
So what? Did you get paid?
Post by Anthony Marsh
In one of our neigboring cities, the cops were the ones who robbed
the bank and killed a co-conspirator.
So they were criminals wearing a badge? Did real cops arrest them?
Post by Anthony Marsh
In my city the Mayor's cousin was a cop and also one of the
biggest drug dealers.
Were they both involved in drug dealing? If so both are criminals
who must be prosecuted. Police Officers enforce the Law and the
Criminals break the Law, period.

Criminals also have their own enforcement system for people who
don't follow their rules. For that reason it is best to support your
local Police Department any way you possibly can, or learn to be
a tough guy and defend yourself.
bigdog
2018-09-10 13:10:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
If LHO was tricked into bringing his rifle to work then he knew
who the trickster was. He could have alerted the police and
asked for immediate protection of his wife and children. This
is all fantasy because LHO had a big ego and wanted to be a
deadly sniper like his heroes Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.
Are you really that naive or are you just joking?
You want the suspect to voluntary go to the police who are famous for
beating confessions out of innocent people? Frazier went in to talk to
Fritz and Fritz typed up a phony confession and told him to sign it or else.
You've lead a sheltered life.
If he was innocent and could lead the police to the guy who tricked him
yes that would be the proactive thing to do, unless he was part of the
conspiracy. Where was LHO standing that day watching the parade if
not in the 6th floor window?
Silly. He tried Cooperating with the police and the first thing he saw
was a cop pointing a gun at his stomach.
How did he cooperate with Police? He broke the Law by shooting at the
You ASSuME whar you haven't proved. Even a murder can cooperate with
the police and some criminals never cooperate with the police.
So how did LHO cooperate with the Dallas Police Department?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
President in a parade. Didn't seem to bother him Jackie was sitting just
inches away and had to endure the horror of seeing her husband's brains
explode.
You convict prople without a trial.
This Newsgroup is a never-ending ongoing trial of sniper and cop killer
LHO.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
If LHO wanted to cooperate he should have volunteered to go with his Boss
and the Police Officer upstairs to search the upper floors. Instead he
abandoned his job and went home to get a pistol. Your excuse is he was
trying to go back to the TSBD and shoot the sniper. Instead he shot a
neighborhood patrol officer who tried to talk with him. Why did he not ask
that Policeman for a ride back to the TSBD building?
What are you babbling about. Don't try to put words omn my mpouth.
So why did LHO not cooperate with a neighborhood DPD patrolman who
stopped to ask him some questions? Why did he shoot this DPD officer
as he got out of his marked Patrol Car?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Or do you mean cooperating as in all those black men when they raised
their hands and said DON'T SHOOT just before they got shot in the back
27 times by a white cop?
What kind of pistol has 27 bullets? I've not heard about that one.
You are not allowed to and I did not speficy just one clip.
What kind of automatic pistol are you referring to?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
are you so anti Police? Do them a favor if somebody breaks into your apt
Silly. I always support good cops.
Good cops sometimes are forced to shoot suspects who do not follow clear
instructions to ceases and desist, who instead resist arrest by attacking
the police officer responding to a request for help from a victim.
Police Officers have the right to self defense from criminal threat of
violence. The police officer is not there to be a spectator watching
someone like you trying to defend your wallet and person from bodily harm.
A cop is allowed to use deadly force to prevent death or great bodily harm
to himself or to another. Deadly force is not authorized to stop a fleeing
suspect unless the cop has probable cause to believe that suspect poses a
clear danger to the public. That South Carolina cop who shot the unarmed
man trying to run from him was not justified in his use of deadly force
and would have gotten away with it had the shooting not been recorded by a
citizen with a camera phone. The prosecutors were unable to convict him
for murder because as is usually the case there will be at least one
person on a jury who will take the cop's side no matter how clear the
evidence was that the shooting was not justified. Unable to convict him
for murder, a federal charge was brought against him for violating the
victim's civil rights. He pleaded guilty believing he would get little to
no jail time. Instead the judge dropped the hammer on him and gave him 20
years. Kudos to the judge. We need more like him.
Post by claviger
Any police officer is expected to immediately take control of the
situation not wait to see who wins the wrestling contest. Not all police
officers are built like The Incredible Hulk, so must carry batons, mace,
and a sidearm. Not all of them get to have a taser. Using tools they do
have available they are expected to defend you from a criminal threat you
can't handle.
Post by Anthony Marsh
I played in the Boston Police Band.
So what? Did you get paid?
Post by Anthony Marsh
In one of our neigboring cities, the cops were the ones who robbed
the bank and killed a co-conspirator.
So they were criminals wearing a badge? Did real cops arrest them?
Post by Anthony Marsh
In my city the Mayor's cousin was a cop and also one of the
biggest drug dealers.
Were they both involved in drug dealing? If so both are criminals
who must be prosecuted. Police Officers enforce the Law and the
Criminals break the Law, period.
That is how it is supposed to work. Sometimes the cops are the criminals.
What I find appalling is their code of silence in which cops he observe
other cops committing heinous crimes and instead of testifying against
them will protect them with their silence. The gangs have a similar code
of silence. If the cops adhere to the same code, how are they better than
the gangs.

This country needs to dispel the myth that all cops are blue knights
putting their lives on the line to keep us safe. To be sure there are cops
who act heroically but there are other cops who are no better than the
gang bangers. We need to be willing to sort them out and treat the
criminal cops as criminals.
Post by claviger
Criminals also have their own enforcement system for people who
don't follow their rules. For that reason it is best to support your
local Police Department any way you possibly can, or learn to be
a tough guy and defend yourself.
Cop's rarely stop crimes in progress. Most of the time they try to find
the person that killed you. The courts have ruled that the cops have no
legal obligation to protect civilians. We saw that play out in the
Parkland school massacre when the school's resource officer as well as
several of his fellow deputies refused to enter the school while the
shooting was going on. When the city police arrived they took action but
by then it was too late.

I don't rely on cops for my personal safety. For one they are unlikely to
be there when I need them. As the saying goes, when seconds count the cops
are just minutes away. If they do get there in time, I have no guarantee
they are going to put their lives on the line to save mine. Some would.
Some wouldn't. My personal safety is primarily my responsibility.
claviger
2018-09-11 20:55:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
A cop is allowed to use deadly force to prevent death or great bodily harm
to himself or to another. Deadly force is not authorized to stop a fleeing
suspect unless the cop has probable cause to believe that suspect poses a
clear danger to the public. That South Carolina cop who shot the unarmed
man trying to run from him was not justified in his use of deadly force
and would have gotten away with it had the shooting not been recorded by a
citizen with a camera phone. The prosecutors were unable to convict him
for murder because as is usually the case there will be at least one
person on a jury who will take the cop's side no matter how clear the
evidence was that the shooting was not justified.
This shooting was completely unjustified. The Police Officer had the
stolen car and a cooperating witness. He should have been laughing too
hard to shoot at the silly suspect running away. Makes you wonder if Human
Beings after all the centuries still have the Predatory Instinct to attack
a fleeing mammal. Could be but this was a very stupid thing to do. I
wonder if this Policeman was a Combat Veteran who had to survive in a
"kill or be killed" environment in Afghanistan or Iraq?
Post by bigdog
Unable to convict him for murder, a federal charge was brought against him
for violating the victim's civil rights.
A Right to Auto Theft? Have Liberals added that to the Bill of Rights?
Post by bigdog
He pleaded guilty believing he would get little to no jail time. Instead the judge
dropped the hammer on him and gave him 20 years. Kudos to the judge. We
need more like him.
This shooting should never have happened. The remaining witness would ID
the guy. Car theft is a dangerous profession. What if he stole a Mafia
car? A single bullet to the head would be a blessing if that was the case.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Any police officer is expected to immediately take control of the
situation not wait to see who wins the wrestling contest. Not all police
officers are built like The Incredible Hulk, so must carry batons, mace,
and a sidearm. Not all of them get to have a taser. Using tools they do
have available they are expected to defend you from a criminal threat you
can't handle.
Post by Anthony Marsh
I played in the Boston Police Band.
So what? Did you get paid?
Post by Anthony Marsh
In one of our neigboring cities, the cops were the ones who robbed
the bank and killed a co-conspirator.
So they were criminals wearing a badge? Did real cops arrest them?
Post by Anthony Marsh
In my city the Mayor's cousin was a cop and also one of the
biggest drug dealers.
Were they both involved in drug dealing? If so both are criminals
who must be prosecuted. Police Officers enforce the Law and the
Criminals break the Law, period.
That is how it is supposed to work. Sometimes the cops are the criminals.
A Criminal is a Criminal with or without a badge. With a Badge is worse.
Post by bigdog
What I find appalling is their code of silence in which cops he observe
other cops committing heinous crimes and instead of testifying against
them will protect them with their silence. The gangs have a similar code
of silence. If the cops adhere to the same code, how are they better than
the gangs.
The Mafia calls it Ometà. It puts honest Cops in an awkward
position. The Offending Cop may have saved the Honest Cop's life in a
previous situation. Most Cops I know are honorable men and women.
However, they tell me there is already a Civil War going on in City
Streets of the USA and all the bad neighborhoods, but the Public doesn't
understand that reality. It is Kill or Be Killed in the Urban Jungles of
modern American culture.

I don'y know why anyone want's to be a Cop. It's basically a no win
situation. This is why many Cops are now slow to respond to any situation
of a property crime in progress. They hope the Perps are gone before they
get there. This is the reality of the new World we now live in the Good
O'le USA. It's back full circle to Law of the Jungle where only the
meanest and toughest survive.
Post by bigdog
This country needs to dispel the myth that all cops are blue knights
putting their lives on the line to keep us safe. To be sure there are cops
who act heroically but there are other cops who are no better than the
gang bangers. We need to be willing to sort them out and treat the
criminal cops as criminals.
Criminal behavior defines the Criminal, Badge or no Badge.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Criminals also have their own enforcement system for people who
don't follow their rules. For that reason it is best to support your
local Police Department any way you possibly can, or learn to be
a tough guy and defend yourself.
Cop's rarely stop crimes in progress. Most of the time they try to find
the person that killed you. The courts have ruled that the cops have no
legal obligation to protect civilians.
Cite please.
Post by bigdog
We saw that play out in the Parkland school massacre when the school's
resource officer as well as several of his fellow deputies refused to enter
the school while the shooting was going on. When the city police arrived
they took action but by then it was too late.
The Deputies were ordered to hold their position. Nobody knows why. The
Teachers and Parents demand to know why.
Post by bigdog
I don't rely on cops for my personal safety. For one they are unlikely to
be there when I need them. As the saying goes, when seconds count the
cops are just minutes away. If they do get there in time, I have no guarantee
they are going to put their lives on the line to save mine. Some would. Some
wouldn't. My personal safety is primarily my responsibility.
The reason for the Second Amendment. Police departments have been
politically neutralized and neutered by "political correctness".
Liberals like Marsh salute the PC Flag until they are a victim then
excoriate the Police for being too slow and too timid when they arrive.

All US Citizens need to take Karate lessons.
claviger
2018-09-13 13:16:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
A cop is allowed to use deadly force to prevent death or great bodily harm
to himself or to another. Deadly force is not authorized to stop a fleeing
suspect unless the cop has probable cause to believe that suspect poses a
clear danger to the public. That South Carolina cop who shot the unarmed
man trying to run from him was not justified in his use of deadly force
and would have gotten away with it had the shooting not been recorded by a
citizen with a camera phone. The prosecutors were unable to convict him
for murder because as is usually the case there will be at least one
person on a jury who will take the cop's side no matter how clear the
evidence was that the shooting was not justified.
This shooting was completely unjustified.
By US Law. In other countries it may be justifiable homicide to protect
private property or government property. The owner of the car could
protect himself and property by any means necessary. A homeowner can
protect all property by any means necessary. In the US shooting a fleeing
criminal is now against the law for the most part depending on
circumstances.

In the case of the South Carolina police officer did the car thief escape
with car keys in his pocket? Were house keys on the same keychain? He was
a felony thief running from a policeman making a lawful arrest while
conducting an investigation. Would escape by this felon put the owner and
family in danger or the witness?

How can a police officer stop and investigate a car thief with a passenger
and still maintain custody and control of the perp and the stolen property
while protecting himself? That is the question we all must answer.

A police officer down in Texas was murdered by three unarmed men in a
routine speeding violation pullover. This solo officer would have needed
to shoot all 3 to survive the attack caught on camera. So how would that
situation be reported in the Media?

I think we know: "Police Officer shoots 3 Unarmed men". He tried to take
control of the situation with a commanding voice but waited too late to
grab his sidearm. They pulled him to the ground and took his pistol away
then shot him to death. What would you advise Police Officers to do in
that situation?

The public needs to be engaged in local Law Enforcement. The Police are
already outnumbered and demoralized and without public support are
choosing the safest lowest level of response for their own safety, like
the Parkland High School situation in Florida.

We must keep in mind these Police Officers are not RoboCops. They are our
neighbors in Uniform. When in a dangerous situation they get nervous just
like we do. From what I read the Baltimore Police Department is doing the
bare minimum because that is what City Hall wants.

So Police must follow orders, regulations, and directives and still manage
to come home alive. If we the Public want the lowest level bare minimum
law enforcement they can do that, but then we grumble about the rising
crime rate. To make matters even worse Liberals want to do away with The
Second Amendment.

The only solution I see is double the Police Department with two officers
in every patrol car. With backup police officers they may not make the
mistakes like the officer in South Carolina did.

Old saying: "What you pay for is what you get."
Anthony Marsh
2018-09-14 14:34:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
A cop is allowed to use deadly force to prevent death or great bodily harm
to himself or to another. Deadly force is not authorized to stop a fleeing
suspect unless the cop has probable cause to believe that suspect poses a
clear danger to the public. That South Carolina cop who shot the unarmed
man trying to run from him was not justified in his use of deadly force
and would have gotten away with it had the shooting not been recorded by a
citizen with a camera phone. The prosecutors were unable to convict him
for murder because as is usually the case there will be at least one
person on a jury who will take the cop's side no matter how clear the
evidence was that the shooting was not justified.
This shooting was completely unjustified.
By US Law. In other countries it may be justifiable homicide to protect
private property or government property. The owner of the car could
protect himself and property by any means necessary. A homeowner can
protect all property by any means necessary. In the US shooting a fleeing
criminal is now against the law for the most part depending on
circumstances.
Are you arguing with yourself?
The varies from state to state.
What you say may be rightly only for your state.
Post by claviger
In the case of the South Carolina police officer did the car thief escape
with car keys in his pocket? Were house keys on the same keychain? He was
a felony thief running from a policeman making a lawful arrest while
conducting an investigation. Would escape by this felon put the owner and
family in danger or the witness?
How can a police officer stop and investigate a car thief with a passenger
and still maintain custody and control of the perp and the stolen property
while protecting himself? That is the question we all must answer.
A police officer down in Texas was murdered by three unarmed men in a
routine speeding violation pullover. This solo officer would have needed
to shoot all 3 to survive the attack caught on camera. So how would that
situation be reported in the Media?
Which attack? Show me.
Post by claviger
I think we know: "Police Officer shoots 3 Unarmed men". He tried to take
control of the situation with a commanding voice but waited too late to
grab his sidearm. They pulled him to the ground and took his pistol away
then shot him to death. What would you advise Police Officers to do in
that situation?
The public needs to be engaged in local Law Enforcement. The Police are
already outnumbered and demoralized and without public support are
choosing the safest lowest level of response for their own safety, like
the Parkland High School situation in Florida.
We must keep in mind these Police Officers are not RoboCops. They are our
neighbors in Uniform. When in a dangerous situation they get nervous just
like we do. From what I read the Baltimore Police Department is doing the
bare minimum because that is what City Hall wants.
So Police must follow orders, regulations, and directives and still manage
to come home alive. If we the Public want the lowest level bare minimum
law enforcement they can do that, but then we grumble about the rising
crime rate. To make matters even worse Liberals want to do away with The
Second Amendment.
The only solution I see is double the Police Department with two officers
in every patrol car. With backup police officers they may not make the
mistakes like the officer in South Carolina did.
Why do you need 2 cops to shoot and kill an unarmed boy?
Post by claviger
Old saying: "What you pay for is what you get."
claviger
2018-09-15 01:21:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
A police officer down in Texas was murdered by three unarmed men in a
routine speeding violation pullover. This solo officer would have needed
to shoot all 3 to survive the attack caught on camera. So how would that
situation be reported in the Media?
Which attack? Show me.
Murder of Darrell Lunsford - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Darrell_Lunsford
Police shooting - Constable Darrell Lunsford - Nacogdoches County, Texas
https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=mVDRo7-kwGc
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
I think we know: "Police Officer shoots 3 Unarmed men". He tried to take
control of the situation with a commanding voice but waited too late to
grab his sidearm. They pulled him to the ground and took his pistol away
then shot him to death. What would you advise Police Officers to do in
that situation?
The public needs to be engaged in local Law Enforcement. The Police are
already outnumbered and demoralized and without public support are
choosing the safest lowest level of response for their own safety, like
the Parkland High School situation in Florida.
We must keep in mind these Police Officers are not RoboCops. They are our
neighbors in Uniform. When in a dangerous situation they get nervous just
like we do. From what I read the Baltimore Police Department is doing the
bare minimum because that is what City Hall wants.
So Police must follow orders, regulations, and directives and still manage
to come home alive. If we the Public want the lowest level bare minimum
law enforcement they can do that, but then we grumble about the rising
crime rate. To make matters even worse Liberals want to do away with The
Second Amendment.
The only solution I see is double the Police Department with two officers
in every patrol car. With backup police officers they may not make the
mistakes like the officer in South Carolina did.
Why do you need 2 cops to shoot and kill an unarmed boy?
Two cops to save lives of Suspects and Police Officers. With two Officers
much easier to control the situation so no one gets hurt. Why don't you
do a citizen ride or walk with your local PD? I did that with an officer
serving traffic warrants. I figured that is no big deal and probably
boring. The officer said it can be dangerous because a felon doesn't know
why you are coming to the front door. It was uneventful but it changed my
perspective on police work, like the danger involved in just doing a
mundane job like delivering warrants.
Anthony Marsh
2018-09-16 00:58:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
A police officer down in Texas was murdered by three unarmed men in a
routine speeding violation pullover. This solo officer would have needed
to shoot all 3 to survive the attack caught on camera. So how would that
situation be reported in the Media?
Which attack? Show me.
Murder of Darrell Lunsford - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Darrell_Lunsford
Police shooting - Constable Darrell Lunsford - Nacogdoches County, Texas
https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=mVDRo7-kwGc
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
I think we know: "Police Officer shoots 3 Unarmed men". He tried to take
control of the situation with a commanding voice but waited too late to
grab his sidearm. They pulled him to the ground and took his pistol away
then shot him to death. What would you advise Police Officers to do in
that situation?
The public needs to be engaged in local Law Enforcement. The Police are
already outnumbered and demoralized and without public support are
choosing the safest lowest level of response for their own safety, like
the Parkland High School situation in Florida.
We must keep in mind these Police Officers are not RoboCops. They are our
neighbors in Uniform. When in a dangerous situation they get nervous just
like we do. From what I read the Baltimore Police Department is doing the
bare minimum because that is what City Hall wants.
So Police must follow orders, regulations, and directives and still manage
to come home alive. If we the Public want the lowest level bare minimum
law enforcement they can do that, but then we grumble about the rising
crime rate. To make matters even worse Liberals want to do away with The
Second Amendment.
The only solution I see is double the Police Department with two officers
in every patrol car. With backup police officers they may not make the
mistakes like the officer in South Carolina did.
Why do you need 2 cops to shoot and kill an unarmed boy?
Two cops to save lives of Suspects and Police Officers. With two Officers
much easier to control the situation so no one gets hurt. Why don't you
do a citizen ride or walk with your local PD? I did that with an officer
Childish. I talk to our local cops every day. What's your problem?
Post by claviger
serving traffic warrants. I figured that is no big deal and probably
boring. The officer said it can be dangerous because a felon doesn't know
Every day is dangerous. The next call might be an ambush.
Tippit knew his assignment was dangerous. They were looking for a
Presidential assassin. What's your point?
Post by claviger
why you are coming to the front door. It was uneventful but it changed my
The cops came to my door last week while I was playing bridge with my
friends and I said come on in. And the chief jokingly asked if we were
gambling and I said no,that's for the little old ladies down in
Community Room. They gamble with dimes.
Post by claviger
perspective on police work, like the danger involved in just doing a
mundane job like delivering warrants.
Or the mudane job of driving a school bus and having the racists
shooting at you.
Jason Burke
2018-09-16 21:25:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
A police officer down in Texas was murdered by three unarmed men in a
routine speeding violation pullover.  This solo officer would have
needed
to shoot all 3 to survive the attack caught on camera. So how would that
situation be reported in the Media?
Which attack? Show me.
Murder of Darrell Lunsford - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Darrell_Lunsford
Police shooting - Constable Darrell Lunsford - Nacogdoches County, Texas
https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=mVDRo7-kwGc
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
I think we know: "Police Officer shoots 3 Unarmed men".  He tried to
take
control of the situation with a commanding voice but waited too late to
grab his sidearm. They pulled him to the ground and took his pistol away
then shot him to death.  What would you advise Police Officers to do in
that situation?
The public needs to be engaged in local Law Enforcement.  The Police
are
already outnumbered and demoralized and without public support are
choosing the safest lowest level of response for their own safety, like
the Parkland High School situation in Florida.
We must keep in mind these Police Officers are not RoboCops. They are our
neighbors in Uniform.  When in a dangerous situation they get
nervous just
like we do.  From what I read the Baltimore Police Department is
doing the
bare minimum because that is what City Hall wants.
So Police must follow orders, regulations, and directives and still manage
to come home alive.  If we the Public want the lowest level bare
minimum
law enforcement they can do that, but then we grumble about the rising
crime rate. To make matters even worse Liberals want to do away with The
Second Amendment.
The only solution I see is double the Police Department with two officers
in every patrol car.  With backup police officers they may not make the
mistakes like the officer in South Carolina did.
Why do you need 2 cops to shoot and kill an unarmed boy?
Two cops to save lives of Suspects and Police Officers. With two Officers
much easier to control the situation so no one gets hurt.  Why don't you
do a citizen ride or walk with your local PD?  I did that with an officer
Childish. I talk to our local cops every day. What's your problem?
Post by claviger
serving traffic warrants.  I figured that is no big deal and probably
boring.  The officer said it can be dangerous because a felon doesn't
know
Every day is dangerous. The next call might be an ambush.
Tippit knew his assignment was dangerous. They were looking for a
Presidential assassin. What's your point?
Post by claviger
why you are coming to the front door.  It was uneventful but it
changed my
The cops came to my door last week while I was playing bridge with my
friends and I said come on in. And the chief jokingly asked if we were
gambling and I said no,that's for the little old ladies down in
Community Room. They gamble with dimes.
Post by claviger
perspective on police work, like the danger involved in just doing a
mundane job like delivering warrants.
Or the mudane job of driving a school bus and having the racists
shooting at you.
Since CT have no concept of reality, why is this even posted?
bigdog
2018-09-14 00:57:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
A cop is allowed to use deadly force to prevent death or great bodily harm
to himself or to another. Deadly force is not authorized to stop a fleeing
suspect unless the cop has probable cause to believe that suspect poses a
clear danger to the public. That South Carolina cop who shot the unarmed
man trying to run from him was not justified in his use of deadly force
and would have gotten away with it had the shooting not been recorded by a
citizen with a camera phone. The prosecutors were unable to convict him
for murder because as is usually the case there will be at least one
person on a jury who will take the cop's side no matter how clear the
evidence was that the shooting was not justified.
This shooting was completely unjustified. The Police Officer had the
stolen car and a cooperating witness. He should have been laughing too
hard to shoot at the silly suspect running away. Makes you wonder if Human
Beings after all the centuries still have the Predatory Instinct to attack
a fleeing mammal. Could be but this was a very stupid thing to do. I
wonder if this Policeman was a Combat Veteran who had to survive in a
"kill or be killed" environment in Afghanistan or Iraq?
Post by bigdog
Unable to convict him for murder, a federal charge was brought against him
for violating the victim's civil rights.
A Right to Auto Theft? Have Liberals added that to the Bill of Rights?
A right to life.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
He pleaded guilty believing he would get little to no jail time. Instead the judge
dropped the hammer on him and gave him 20 years. Kudos to the judge. We
need more like him.
This shooting should never have happened. The remaining witness would ID
the guy. Car theft is a dangerous profession. What if he stole a Mafia
car? A single bullet to the head would be a blessing if that was the case.
It neither justifies the murder nor is it a mitigating factor.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Any police officer is expected to immediately take control of the
situation not wait to see who wins the wrestling contest. Not all police
officers are built like The Incredible Hulk, so must carry batons, mace,
and a sidearm. Not all of them get to have a taser. Using tools they do
have available they are expected to defend you from a criminal threat you
can't handle.
Post by Anthony Marsh
I played in the Boston Police Band.
So what? Did you get paid?
Post by Anthony Marsh
In one of our neigboring cities, the cops were the ones who robbed
the bank and killed a co-conspirator.
So they were criminals wearing a badge? Did real cops arrest them?
Post by Anthony Marsh
In my city the Mayor's cousin was a cop and also one of the
biggest drug dealers.
Were they both involved in drug dealing? If so both are criminals
who must be prosecuted. Police Officers enforce the Law and the
Criminals break the Law, period.
That is how it is supposed to work. Sometimes the cops are the criminals.
A Criminal is a Criminal with or without a badge. With a Badge is worse.
I agree but too many prosecutors and jurors are willing to excuse cops who
commit heinous crimes even if the evidence is clear cut.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
What I find appalling is their code of silence in which cops he observe
other cops committing heinous crimes and instead of testifying against
them will protect them with their silence. The gangs have a similar code
of silence. If the cops adhere to the same code, how are they better than
the gangs.
The Mafia calls it Ometà. It puts honest Cops in an awkward
position. The Offending Cop may have saved the Honest Cop's life in a
previous situation. Most Cops I know are honorable men and women.
However, they tell me there is already a Civil War going on in City
Streets of the USA and all the bad neighborhoods, but the Public doesn't
understand that reality. It is Kill or Be Killed in the Urban Jungles of
modern American culture.
I don'y know why anyone want's to be a Cop. It's basically a no win
situation. This is why many Cops are now slow to respond to any situation
of a property crime in progress. They hope the Perps are gone before they
get there. This is the reality of the new World we now live in the Good
O'le USA. It's back full circle to Law of the Jungle where only the
meanest and toughest survive.
Another myth is that cops jobs are especially dangerous. Trash collectors
have a much more dangerous job but nobody plays the bagpipes for them when
they are killed on the job. Firefighters face far more danger. Even when
they aren't seriously injured, the accumulative effects of inhaling smoke
takes a long term toll.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
This country needs to dispel the myth that all cops are blue knights
putting their lives on the line to keep us safe. To be sure there are cops
who act heroically but there are other cops who are no better than the
gang bangers. We need to be willing to sort them out and treat the
criminal cops as criminals.
Criminal behavior defines the Criminal, Badge or no Badge.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Criminals also have their own enforcement system for people who
don't follow their rules. For that reason it is best to support your
local Police Department any way you possibly can, or learn to be
a tough guy and defend yourself.
Cop's rarely stop crimes in progress. Most of the time they try to find
the person that killed you. The courts have ruled that the cops have no
legal obligation to protect civilians.
Cite please.
https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html

https://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
We saw that play out in the Parkland school massacre when the school's
resource officer as well as several of his fellow deputies refused to enter
the school while the shooting was going on. When the city police arrived
they took action but by then it was too late.
The Deputies were ordered to hold their position. Nobody knows why. The
Teachers and Parents demand to know why.
They had no duty to intervene. The school resource officer who was on duty
when the shooting started declined to enter the building and expose
himself to danger.

A similar situation occurred at the Orlando night club shooting. An off
duty officer had been hired to provide security. When the shooting started
he fled the premises and called for back up. Two uniformed officer arrived
and the three of them entered the building, only to retreat when they saw
what they were up against, a single gunman with a semi-automatic rifle.
They called SWAT to deal with the situation.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I don't rely on cops for my personal safety. For one they are unlikely to
be there when I need them. As the saying goes, when seconds count the
cops are just minutes away. If they do get there in time, I have no guarantee
they are going to put their lives on the line to save mine. Some would. Some
wouldn't. My personal safety is primarily my responsibility.
The reason for the Second Amendment. Police departments have been
politically neutralized and neutered by "political correctness".
Liberals like Marsh salute the PC Flag until they are a victim then
excoriate the Police for being too slow and too timid when they arrive.
It has nothing to do with political correctness. Cops have never been able
to protect people from violence. There aren't nearly enough of them to do
that.
Post by claviger
All US Citizens need to take Karate lessons.
I find my .44 Magnum and 12 gauge pump action shotguns to be much better
choices, especially against the guy who brings a knife to a gunfight. My
carry piece is a 40 S&W Glock.

Another myth is that Karate is an especially effective form of self
defense. Penn and Teller did an expose that showed the breaking of boards
and smashing of blocks is little more than a parlor trick. To be sure, any
of the martial arts are effective methods of hand-to-hand combat, but
martial artists are no better with their hands than traditional boxers.
The point of the Penn and Teller program is that being proficient in the
martial arts doesn't make somebody a super hero capable of defending one
self against multiple attackers or an armed attacker.
Anthony Marsh
2018-09-15 15:15:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
A cop is allowed to use deadly force to prevent death or great bodily harm
to himself or to another. Deadly force is not authorized to stop a fleeing
suspect unless the cop has probable cause to believe that suspect poses a
clear danger to the public. That South Carolina cop who shot the unarmed
man trying to run from him was not justified in his use of deadly force
and would have gotten away with it had the shooting not been recorded by a
citizen with a camera phone. The prosecutors were unable to convict him
for murder because as is usually the case there will be at least one
person on a jury who will take the cop's side no matter how clear the
evidence was that the shooting was not justified.
This shooting was completely unjustified. The Police Officer had the
stolen car and a cooperating witness. He should have been laughing too
hard to shoot at the silly suspect running away. Makes you wonder if Human
Beings after all the centuries still have the Predatory Instinct to attack
a fleeing mammal. Could be but this was a very stupid thing to do. I
wonder if this Policeman was a Combat Veteran who had to survive in a
"kill or be killed" environment in Afghanistan or Iraq?
Post by bigdog
Unable to convict him for murder, a federal charge was brought against him
for violating the victim's civil rights.
A Right to Auto Theft? Have Liberals added that to the Bill of Rights?
A right to life.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
He pleaded guilty believing he would get little to no jail time. Instead the judge
dropped the hammer on him and gave him 20 years. Kudos to the judge. We
need more like him.
This shooting should never have happened. The remaining witness would ID
the guy. Car theft is a dangerous profession. What if he stole a Mafia
car? A single bullet to the head would be a blessing if that was the case.
It neither justifies the murder nor is it a mitigating factor.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Any police officer is expected to immediately take control of the
situation not wait to see who wins the wrestling contest. Not all police
officers are built like The Incredible Hulk, so must carry batons, mace,
and a sidearm. Not all of them get to have a taser. Using tools they do
have available they are expected to defend you from a criminal threat you
can't handle.
Post by Anthony Marsh
I played in the Boston Police Band.
So what? Did you get paid?
Post by Anthony Marsh
In one of our neigboring cities, the cops were the ones who robbed
the bank and killed a co-conspirator.
So they were criminals wearing a badge? Did real cops arrest them?
Post by Anthony Marsh
In my city the Mayor's cousin was a cop and also one of the
biggest drug dealers.
Were they both involved in drug dealing? If so both are criminals
who must be prosecuted. Police Officers enforce the Law and the
Criminals break the Law, period.
That is how it is supposed to work. Sometimes the cops are the criminals.
A Criminal is a Criminal with or without a badge. With a Badge is worse.
I agree but too many prosecutors and jurors are willing to excuse cops who
commit heinous crimes even if the evidence is clear cut.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
What I find appalling is their code of silence in which cops he observe
other cops committing heinous crimes and instead of testifying against
them will protect them with their silence. The gangs have a similar code
of silence. If the cops adhere to the same code, how are they better than
the gangs.
The Mafia calls it Omet??. It puts honest Cops in an awkward
position. The Offending Cop may have saved the Honest Cop's life in a
previous situation. Most Cops I know are honorable men and women.
However, they tell me there is already a Civil War going on in City
Streets of the USA and all the bad neighborhoods, but the Public doesn't
understand that reality. It is Kill or Be Killed in the Urban Jungles of
modern American culture.
I don'y know why anyone want's to be a Cop. It's basically a no win
situation. This is why many Cops are now slow to respond to any situation
of a property crime in progress. They hope the Perps are gone before they
get there. This is the reality of the new World we now live in the Good
O'le USA. It's back full circle to Law of the Jungle where only the
meanest and toughest survive.
Another myth is that cops jobs are especially dangerous. Trash collectors
have a much more dangerous job but nobody plays the bagpipes for them when
they are killed on the job. Firefighters face far more danger. Even when
they aren't seriously injured, the accumulative effects of inhaling smoke
takes a long term toll.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
This country needs to dispel the myth that all cops are blue knights
putting their lives on the line to keep us safe. To be sure there are cops
who act heroically but there are other cops who are no better than the
gang bangers. We need to be willing to sort them out and treat the
criminal cops as criminals.
Criminal behavior defines the Criminal, Badge or no Badge.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Criminals also have their own enforcement system for people who
don't follow their rules. For that reason it is best to support your
local Police Department any way you possibly can, or learn to be
a tough guy and defend yourself.
Cop's rarely stop crimes in progress. Most of the time they try to find
the person that killed you. The courts have ruled that the cops have no
legal obligation to protect civilians.
Cite please.
https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html
https://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
We saw that play out in the Parkland school massacre when the school's
resource officer as well as several of his fellow deputies refused to enter
the school while the shooting was going on. When the city police arrived
they took action but by then it was too late.
The Deputies were ordered to hold their position. Nobody knows why. The
Teachers and Parents demand to know why.
They had no duty to intervene. The school resource officer who was on duty
when the shooting started declined to enter the building and expose
himself to danger.
A similar situation occurred at the Orlando night club shooting. An off
duty officer had been hired to provide security. When the shooting started
he fled the premises and called for back up. Two uniformed officer arrived
and the three of them entered the building, only to retreat when they saw
what they were up against, a single gunman with a semi-automatic rifle.
They called SWAT to deal with the situation.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
I don't rely on cops for my personal safety. For one they are unlikely to
be there when I need them. As the saying goes, when seconds count the
cops are just minutes away. If they do get there in time, I have no guarantee
they are going to put their lives on the line to save mine. Some would. Some
wouldn't. My personal safety is primarily my responsibility.
The reason for the Second Amendment. Police departments have been
politically neutralized and neutered by "political correctness".
Liberals like Marsh salute the PC Flag until they are a victim then
excoriate the Police for being too slow and too timid when they arrive.
It has nothing to do with political correctness. Cops have never been able
to protect people from violence. There aren't nearly enough of them to do
that.
That's horrible indictment to make. Maybe what you mean is that cops
can't protect everyone all the time. We accept that.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
All US Citizens need to take Karate lessons.
I find my .44 Magnum and 12 gauge pump action shotguns to be much better
choices, especially against the guy who brings a knife to a gunfight. My
carry piece is a 40 S&W Glock.
Silly. More often peoples own guns are used against them or another
family member.
Post by bigdog
Another myth is that Karate is an especially effective form of self
defense. Penn and Teller did an expose that showed the breaking of boards
and smashing of blocks is little more than a parlor trick. To be sure, any
of the martial arts are effective methods of hand-to-hand combat, but
martial artists are no better with their hands than traditional boxers.
The point of the Penn and Teller program is that being proficient in the
martial arts doesn't make somebody a super hero capable of defending one
self against multiple attackers or an armed attacker.
I think Bruce Lee demonstrated that quite well.
claviger
2018-09-16 00:24:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Unable to convict him for murder, a federal charge was brought against
him for violating the victim's civil rights.
A Right to Auto Theft? Have Liberals added that to the Bill of Rights?
A right to life.
A right to a life of crime?
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
This shooting should never have happened. The remaining witness would ID
the guy. Car theft is a dangerous profession. What if he stole a Mafia car?
A single bullet to the head would be a blessing if that was the case.
It neither justifies the murder nor is it a mitigating factor.
We're talking about OC. They operate by a different set of rules.
Post by bigdog
Another myth is that cops jobs are especially dangerous.
Do you wear a bullet proof vest to work? I don't either. They do.
Post by bigdog
Trash collectors have a much more dangerous job but nobody plays the
bagpipes for them when they are killed on the job. Firefighters face far
more danger. Even when they aren't seriously injured, the accumulative
effects of inhaling smoke takes a long term toll.
14. Police and sheriff’s patrol officers
Fatal injuries in 2016: 14.6 per 100,000 workers
Total: 108 fatal injuries, 28,740 nonfatal injuries
Most common accident: Intentional injury by other person
Median annual wage: $59,680

Some 108 police and sheriff’s patrol officers died in action in
2016, the most of any year since 2011 and among the most of any profession
when adjusted for the number of people in the profession. The most common
cause of death on the job were intentional shootings, which claimed the
lives of 46 officers last year. Almost as many officers died in car
accidents.

Police officers also suffered 28,740 nonfatal injuries, which required a
median of nine days off to recover — on day more than the national
median recovery time. Police officers often work around the clock, and
1.6% of nonfatal injuries in 2016 occurred at least 12 hours into an
officer’s shift.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/careers/2018/01/09/workplace-fatalities-25-most-dangerous-jobs-america/1002500001/
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
We saw that play out in the Parkland school massacre when the school's
resource officer as well as several of his fellow deputies refused to enter
the school while the shooting was going on. When the city police arrived
they took action but by then it was too late.
The Deputies were ordered to hold their position. Nobody knows why.
The Teachers and Parents demand to know why.
They had no duty to intervene. The school resource officer who was on duty
when the shooting started declined to enter the building and expose
himself to danger.
What is a resource officer? If there was no danger then no need for
a security officer. A security officer is there to confront danger.
Post by bigdog
A similar situation occurred at the Orlando night club shooting. An off
duty officer had been hired to provide security. When the shooting started
he fled the premises and called for back up. Two uniformed officer arrived
and the three of them entered the building, only to retreat when they saw
what they were up against, a single gunman with a semi-automatic rifle.
That is disappointing. If they spread out seems like one of them
could hit the target. Did they realize there was only one gunman?
Post by bigdog
They called SWAT to deal with the situation.
SWAT are police officers too.
Post by bigdog
It has nothing to do with political correctness. Cops have never been able
to protect people from violence. There aren't nearly enough of them to do
that.
The reason for the Second Amendment.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
All US Citizens need to take Karate lessons.
I find my .44 Magnum and 12 gauge pump action shotguns to be much better
choices, especially against the guy who brings a knife to a gunfight. My
carry piece is a 40 S&W Glock.
Another myth is that Karate is an especially effective form of self
defense. Penn and Teller did an expose that showed the breaking of boards
and smashing of blocks is little more than a parlor trick. To be sure, any
of the martial arts are effective methods of hand-to-hand combat, but
martial artists are no better with their hands than traditional boxers.
The point of the Penn and Teller program is that being proficient in the
martial arts doesn't make somebody a super hero capable of defending one
self against multiple attackers or an armed attacker.
Another reason for the Second Amendment.
bigdog
2018-09-17 14:20:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Unable to convict him for murder, a federal charge was brought against
him for violating the victim's civil rights.
A Right to Auto Theft? Have Liberals added that to the Bill of Rights?
A right to life.
A right to a life of crime?
Why would you add crime to what I wrote? The victim had a right to life
and the cop violated that right. The cop got what he deserved. His victim
did not.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
This shooting should never have happened. The remaining witness would ID
the guy. Car theft is a dangerous profession. What if he stole a Mafia car?
A single bullet to the head would be a blessing if that was the case.
It neither justifies the murder nor is it a mitigating factor.
We're talking about OC. They operate by a different set of rules.
You are talking about a hypothetical. I am talking about what happened.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Another myth is that cops jobs are especially dangerous.
Do you wear a bullet proof vest to work? I don't either. They do.
Not standard equipment. It is for SWAT. In some situations the regular
cops might don them but they typical do not wear them.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Trash collectors have a much more dangerous job but nobody plays the
bagpipes for them when they are killed on the job. Firefighters face far
more danger. Even when they aren't seriously injured, the accumulative
effects of inhaling smoke takes a long term toll.
14. Police and sheriff’s patrol officers
Fatal injuries in 2016: 14.6 per 100,000 workers
Total: 108 fatal injuries, 28,740 nonfatal injuries
Most common accident: Intentional injury by other person
Median annual wage: $59,680
Some 108 police and sheriff’s patrol officers died in action in
2016, the most of any year since 2011 and among the most of any profession
when adjusted for the number of people in the profession. The most common
cause of death on the job were intentional shootings, which claimed the
lives of 46 officers last year. Almost as many officers died in car
accidents.
Police officers also suffered 28,740 nonfatal injuries, which required a
median of nine days off to recover — on day more than the national
median recovery time. Police officers often work around the clock, and
1.6% of nonfatal injuries in 2016 occurred at least 12 hours into an
officer’s shift.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/careers/2018/01/09/workplace-fatalities-25-most-dangerous-jobs-america/1002500001/
Here is another list.

https://www.bankrate.com/finance/personal-finance/10-most-dangerous-jobs-us-1.aspx#slide=11

It lists just the top ten. There are some differences but cops don't make
the top ten in either list. Going by your list, we can see that there are
jobs that are far more dangerous that pay a lot less than what cops make.
I'd say they are well compensated. I am not saying cops jobs aren't
dangerous. My problem is when people use that danger as an excuse for
abhorrent behavior. Would you be willing to excuse a logger who murdered
somebody while on the job because his job is dangerous? So why are people
willing to do that for cops? We are as a society far too deferential to
cops. We need to hold them accountable when they act out of line and we
don't do that.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
We saw that play out in the Parkland school massacre when the school's
resource officer as well as several of his fellow deputies refused to enter
the school while the shooting was going on. When the city police arrived
they took action but by then it was too late.
The Deputies were ordered to hold their position. Nobody knows why.
The Teachers and Parents demand to know why.
They had no duty to intervene. The school resource officer who was on duty
when the shooting started declined to enter the building and expose
himself to danger.
What is a resource officer? If there was no danger then no need for
a security officer. A security officer is there to confront danger.
A school resource officer is one assigned by his department to work at a school. They are there to help maintain order. This explains it better than I
could.

http://ezinearticles.com/?Duties,-Responsibilities-of-School-Resource-Officer&id=4348599

At Parkland, the school resource officer was an armed and uniformed
officer with full police powers. He could have entered the building and
confronted the shooter but chose not to. He seemed more concerned with
protecting his own life than that of the students in harm's way. That was
his choice. The law doesn't require him to protect the public. What the
incident illustrates is that not all cops are heroes. Some are. Some
aren't. Some would have risked their lives to save those students being
slaughtered. I wouldn't hazard a guess as to the percentage.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
A similar situation occurred at the Orlando night club shooting. An off
duty officer had been hired to provide security. When the shooting started
he fled the premises and called for back up. Two uniformed officer arrived
and the three of them entered the building, only to retreat when they saw
what they were up against, a single gunman with a semi-automatic rifle.
That is disappointing. If they spread out seems like one of them
could hit the target. Did they realize there was only one gunman?
Once again, they were no required by law to provide protection to those
being murdered. They were free to choose risk their lives to save others
and chose not to. Clearly they were no heroes.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
They called SWAT to deal with the situation.
SWAT are police officers too.
Yes they are and in dangerous situations they don full body armor and go
in with overwhelming force. That is reasonable. The problem is by waiting
for SWAT rather than dealing with the situation themselves, a lot more
people died because of the inaction by the first responders.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
It has nothing to do with political correctness. Cops have never been able
to protect people from violence. There aren't nearly enough of them to do
that.
The reason for the Second Amendment.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
All US Citizens need to take Karate lessons.
I find my .44 Magnum and 12 gauge pump action shotguns to be much better
choices, especially against the guy who brings a knife to a gunfight. My
carry piece is a 40 S&W Glock.
Another myth is that Karate is an especially effective form of self
defense. Penn and Teller did an expose that showed the breaking of boards
and smashing of blocks is little more than a parlor trick. To be sure, any
of the martial arts are effective methods of hand-to-hand combat, but
martial artists are no better with their hands than traditional boxers.
The point of the Penn and Teller program is that being proficient in the
martial arts doesn't make somebody a super hero capable of defending one
self against multiple attackers or an armed attacker.
Another reason for the Second Amendment.
I fully support the Second Amendment. I don't vote for candidates who
don't.
claviger
2018-09-18 02:31:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Unable to convict him for murder, a federal charge was brought against
him for violating the victim's civil rights.
A Right to Auto Theft? Have Liberals added that to the Bill of Rights?
A right to life.
A right to a life of crime?
Why would you add crime to what I wrote? The victim had a right to life
and the cop violated that right.
In his mind the car thief had a right to crime. The victim was the owner
of the car. Both had a right to life under US Law.
Post by bigdog
The cop got what he deserved. His victim did not.
Under US and State Law yes. Not in other countries. The victim was
a thief who victimized other people.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
This shooting should never have happened. The remaining witness would ID
the guy. Car theft is a dangerous profession. What if he stole a Mafia car?
A single bullet to the head would be a blessing if that was the case.
It neither justifies the murder nor is it a mitigating factor.
We're talking about OC. They operate by a different set of rules.
You are talking about a hypothetical. I am talking about what happened.
Under US Legal system the OC ignores. Killing a car thief under the
OC system is acceptable and SOP.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Another myth is that cops jobs are especially dangerous.
Do you wear a bullet proof vest to work? I don't either. They do.
Not standard equipment. It is for SWAT. In some situations the regular
cops might don them but they typical do not wear them.
Standard equipment where I live.
Post by bigdog
It lists just the top ten. There are some differences but cops don't make
the top ten in either list. Going by your list, we can see that there are
jobs that are far more dangerous that pay a lot less than what cops make.
I'd say they are well compensated. I am not saying cops jobs aren't
dangerous. My problem is when people use that danger as an excuse for
abhorrent behavior. Would you be willing to excuse a logger who murdered
somebody while on the job because his job is dangerous? So why are people
willing to do that for cops? We are as a society far too deferential to
cops. We need to hold them accountable when they act out of line and we
don't do that.
To say being a Police Officer is not a dangerous occupation is ridiculous.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
We saw that play out in the Parkland school massacre when the school's
resource officer as well as several of his fellow deputies refused to enter
the school while the shooting was going on. When the city police arrived
they took action but by then it was too late.
The Deputies were ordered to hold their position. Nobody knows why.
The Teachers and Parents demand to know why.
They had no duty to intervene. The school resource officer who was on duty
when the shooting started declined to enter the building and expose
himself to danger.
What is a resource officer? If there was no danger then no need for
a security officer. A security officer is there to confront danger.
A school resource officer is one assigned by his department to work at a
school. They are there to help maintain order. This explains it better than
I could.
Don't understand the title "resource officer". Does he/she do security or
not?
Post by bigdog
http://ezinearticles.com/?Duties,-Responsibilities-of-School-Resource-Officer&id=4348599
At Parkland, the school resource officer was an armed and uniformed
officer with full police powers. He could have entered the building and
confronted the shooter but chose not to. He seemed more concerned with
protecting his own life than that of the students in harm's way. That was
his choice. The law doesn't require him to protect the public. What the
incident illustrates is that not all cops are heroes. Some are. Some
aren't. Some would have risked their lives to save those students being
slaughtered. I wouldn't hazard a guess as to the percentage.
What law? Does the school district require any response to deadly attack?
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
A similar situation occurred at the Orlando night club shooting. An off
duty officer had been hired to provide security. When the shooting started
he fled the premises and called for back up. Two uniformed officer arrived
and the three of them entered the building, only to retreat when they saw
what they were up against, a single gunman with a semi-automatic rifle.
That is disappointing. If they spread out seems like one of them
could hit the target. Did they realize there was only one gunman?>
Once again, they were not required by law to provide protection to those
being murdered. They were free to choose risk their lives to save others
and chose not to. Clearly they were no heroes.
When hired by a nightclub what is their job description?
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
They called SWAT to deal with the situation.
SWAT are police officers too.
Yes they are and in dangerous situations they don full body armor and go
in with overwhelming force. That is reasonable. The problem is by waiting
for SWAT rather than dealing with the situation themselves, a lot more
people died because of the inaction by the first responders.
So what is the solution to the problem?
claviger
2018-09-19 03:50:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Unable to convict him for murder, a federal charge was brought against
him for violating the victim's civil rights.
A Right to Auto Theft? Have Liberals added that to the Bill of Rights?
A right to life.
A right to a life of crime?
Why would you add crime to what I wrote? The victim had a right to life
and the cop violated that right.
In his mind the car thief has a right to commit crimes to support both his
family and his drug habit. This is now part of American culture whether
we like it or not. The Police officer has a right to Protect himself and
any innocent victims or bystanders with deadly force. The Police
Department he works for has a policy to not shoot running perps who do not
pose an obvious physical threat to the Officer or any innocent bystanders.
Those are the Rules of Engagement, period. This Police Officer did not
have the authority to execute this fleeing felon with The Death Penalty.

There are ongoing implications to this national problem of car theft. It
would appear Police Departments need to quit hiring ex-football players
and start hiring ex-track stars for from now on. The psychology is
opposite between the two sports. Violence vs Speed. Another innate
advantage is track guys are skinny and football players are stocky
therefor trackster cops present a thinner profile in the event of a
shootout.

If that doesn't work the next alternative is disband all Police
Departments and let US citizens deal with this problem using Carry
Permits. If that does not work out either another possible solution is
contract all urban policing responsibilities to The Mafia and let them do
what they do. This would be very interesting because they control the drug
trade and already have experienced enforcers. Instead of the Police
Departments being sued any perps with a complaint must sue the Mafia.

There is actually an interesting precedent for this option. At one time
the Mafia controlled Las Vegas and New Orleans. They would not tolerate
any harm or hassle to the tourists, who were safe 24 hrs a day in both
cities. At one time Las Vegas was known as the safest city in America and
for that reason the most Fun City in America. Old Timers say both cities
are not as safe or fun as in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. That could change if
US Cities contracted directly with the Mafia and established a modern
codependent relationship.

Some historians and professors of sociology are concerned with the fraying
bonds of national identity and adhesion to societal norms. The new normal
is no more unifying normality. That means new patterns of behavior and
templates for coexistence must be found to replace disintegration of mores
from the past. One possibility is drug culture will be a unifying
influence in certain parts of the national landscape. People will
willingly do what they like, believe in, and take pleasure in.

Another changing dynamic is the old fashioned work ethic that seems to be
less popular with native born Americans but alive and well with newcomers
from other parts of the world. Nature favors the strong and this reality
will determine success to any group that understands and uses it to
enhance monetary inflow and wealth accumulation.

One thing I noticed recently is tree companies used to be mostly new
arrivals from Mexico. Now those companies are still owned by Mexicans but
the new workers are from Honduras. From experience I know Mexicans are
very good workers, very methodical at an even pace and can take care of
two jobs a day, which is a lot of hard work with heavy pulling and
lifting. Today I watched a crew in my neighborhood take down a large old
tree and found out 3/4 were from Honduras and asked them how many
customers they had left, and they told me 3 more! I couldn't believe they
can do 4 a day!! They reacted like no problema and want the dinero. So
Mexican workers now have competition from the Hondurans, the poorest
country in Central America. They seemed to be a happy bunch and
appreciate the opportunity for mas dinero. Once again the profit motive
is the key factor for success. Their attitude is get out of the way and
let me work! They did an excellent job.
bigdog
2018-09-21 01:17:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Unable to convict him for murder, a federal charge was brought against
him for violating the victim's civil rights.
A Right to Auto Theft? Have Liberals added that to the Bill of Rights?
A right to life.
A right to a life of crime?
Why would you add crime to what I wrote? The victim had a right to life
and the cop violated that right.
In his mind the car thief has a right to commit crimes to support both his
family and his drug habit. This is now part of American culture whether
we like it or not. The Police officer has a right to Protect himself and
any innocent victims or bystanders with deadly force. The Police
Department he works for has a policy to not shoot running perps who do not
pose an obvious physical threat to the Officer or any innocent bystanders.
Those are the Rules of Engagement, period. This Police Officer did not
have the authority to execute this fleeing felon with The Death Penalty.
It is not just police department policy that cops don't shoot fleeing
perps. That is the law. SCOTUS ruled on that point back in 1967. The only
time a deadly force is justified against a fleeing suspect is if there is
probable cause that the perp poses an imminent threat to the public. For
example, if a cop had probable cause to believe Oswald had shot Tippit, it
would be reasonable to believe he might shoot others and the use of deadly
force might be justified in that event. When an unarmed man suspect is
suspected of a non-violent crime, the use of deadly force is in no way
justified.
Post by claviger
There are ongoing implications to this national problem of car theft. It
would appear Police Departments need to quit hiring ex-football players
and start hiring ex-track stars for from now on. The psychology is
opposite between the two sports. Violence vs Speed. Another innate
advantage is track guys are skinny and football players are stocky
therefor trackster cops present a thinner profile in the event of a
shootout.
Whatever the solution to car theft is, it does not involve greater use of
deadly force. Stealing a car is not justification for the cops to kill the
suspect.
Post by claviger
If that doesn't work the next alternative is disband all Police
Departments and let US citizens deal with this problem using Carry
Permits. If that does not work out either another possible solution is
contract all urban policing responsibilities to The Mafia and let them do
what they do. This would be very interesting because they control the drug
trade and already have experienced enforcers. Instead of the Police
Departments being sued any perps with a complaint must sue the Mafia.
Citizens have no right to use deadly force to protect their property. I
learned that in the class I took to qualify for a concealed carry permit.
Deadly force is only authorized if one is in danger of death or great
bodily harm (rape is considered great bodily harm). In my state, I am
allowed to intervene with deadly force on behalf of a third party only if
that third party would have been justified in using deadly force. If I
don't know the particulars of an incident, I place myself in legal
jeopardy if I intervene with deadly force. For example, suppose I see
someone beating another person to a pulp with a tire iron and I used
deadly force to stop him. Deadly force is not justified if the person
using deadly force initiated a confrontation. If it turns out the guy
getting beaten to death started the altercation by punching the other guy
in the mouth, he would not be justified in using deadly force to thwart
his attacker and I would not be justified in using deadly force on his
behalf. That is why the attorney who presented the laws to our class
recommended we not intervene with deadly force on behalf of another.

I should point out that Ohio has some of the strictest laws in the country
regarding use of deadly force. In most states, the use of deadly force
would be justified under the above scenario. It varies from state to state
but as long as the use of deadly force was based on a reasonable judgement
it would be justified.
Post by claviger
There is actually an interesting precedent for this option. At one time
the Mafia controlled Las Vegas and New Orleans. They would not tolerate
any harm or hassle to the tourists, who were safe 24 hrs a day in both
cities. At one time Las Vegas was known as the safest city in America and
for that reason the most Fun City in America. Old Timers say both cities
are not as safe or fun as in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. That could change if
US Cities contracted directly with the Mafia and established a modern
codependent relationship.
Interestingly enough, the protection racket actually began when citizens
paid a fee to the Mafia to protect them from other criminals. There were
some who chose not to pay for that protection so the Mafia upped the ante
by giving citizens reason to fear.
Post by claviger
Some historians and professors of sociology are concerned with the fraying
bonds of national identity and adhesion to societal norms. The new normal
is no more unifying normality. That means new patterns of behavior and
templates for coexistence must be found to replace disintegration of mores
from the past. One possibility is drug culture will be a unifying
influence in certain parts of the national landscape. People will
willingly do what they like, believe in, and take pleasure in.
As a libertarian, I believe any adult should have the right to ingest any
substance into his/her body that they choose. I would end the drug war and
legalize all narcotics. I draw the line when it comes to minors. Society
can and should protect them from their self destructive impulses and
anyone selling harmful substances to them should be dealt with harshly by
the law. As for adults engaging in voluntary transactions, I think the
government should butt out.
Post by claviger
Another changing dynamic is the old fashioned work ethic that seems to be
less popular with native born Americans but alive and well with newcomers
from other parts of the world. Nature favors the strong and this reality
will determine success to any group that understands and uses it to
enhance monetary inflow and wealth accumulation.
Individual responsibility is another of the basic tenants of
libertarianism. The government owes us nothing other than to secure our
fundamental rights. According to the Declaration of Independence, that is
the reason governments are instituted among men.
Post by claviger
One thing I noticed recently is tree companies used to be mostly new
arrivals from Mexico. Now those companies are still owned by Mexicans but
the new workers are from Honduras. From experience I know Mexicans are
very good workers, very methodical at an even pace and can take care of
two jobs a day, which is a lot of hard work with heavy pulling and
lifting. Today I watched a crew in my neighborhood take down a large old
tree and found out 3/4 were from Honduras and asked them how many
customers they had left, and they told me 3 more! I couldn't believe they
can do 4 a day!! They reacted like no problema and want the dinero. So
Mexican workers now have competition from the Hondurans, the poorest
country in Central America. They seemed to be a happy bunch and
appreciate the opportunity for mas dinero. Once again the profit motive
is the key factor for success. Their attitude is get out of the way and
let me work! They did an excellent job.
Capitalism is based on the premise that society works best when people are
allowed to act in their own self interest. In doing so, they provide
benefit to society as a whole. Regardless of their nationality, the people
doing the tree work aren't doing so for the benefit of their customers.
They are doing it for their own benefit. They earn a living by providing a
service to their customers and their customers benefit from their efforts.
Anthony Marsh
2018-09-22 14:06:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Unable to convict him for murder, a federal charge was brought against
him for violating the victim's civil rights.
A Right to Auto Theft? Have Liberals added that to the Bill of Rights?
A right to life.
A right to a life of crime?
Why would you add crime to what I wrote? The victim had a right to life
and the cop violated that right.
In his mind the car thief has a right to commit crimes to support both his
family and his drug habit. This is now part of American culture whether
we like it or not. The Police officer has a right to Protect himself and
any innocent victims or bystanders with deadly force. The Police
Department he works for has a policy to not shoot running perps who do not
pose an obvious physical threat to the Officer or any innocent bystanders.
Those are the Rules of Engagement, period. This Police Officer did not
have the authority to execute this fleeing felon with The Death Penalty.
It is not just police department policy that cops don't shoot fleeing
perps. That is the law. SCOTUS ruled on that point back in 1967. The only
time a deadly force is justified against a fleeing suspect is if there is
probable cause that the perp poses an imminent threat to the public. For
example, if a cop had probable cause to believe Oswald had shot Tippit, it
would be reasonable to believe he might shoot others and the use of deadly
force might be justified in that event. When an unarmed man suspect is
suspected of a non-violent crime, the use of deadly force is in no way
justified.
Post by claviger
There are ongoing implications to this national problem of car theft. It
would appear Police Departments need to quit hiring ex-football players
and start hiring ex-track stars for from now on. The psychology is
opposite between the two sports. Violence vs Speed. Another innate
advantage is track guys are skinny and football players are stocky
therefor trackster cops present a thinner profile in the event of a
shootout.
Whatever the solution to car theft is, it does not involve greater use of
deadly force. Stealing a car is not justification for the cops to kill the
suspect.
Post by claviger
If that doesn't work the next alternative is disband all Police
Departments and let US citizens deal with this problem using Carry
Permits. If that does not work out either another possible solution is
contract all urban policing responsibilities to The Mafia and let them do
what they do. This would be very interesting because they control the drug
trade and already have experienced enforcers. Instead of the Police
Departments being sued any perps with a complaint must sue the Mafia.
Citizens have no right to use deadly force to protect their property. I
It varies from state to state and even by cities and counties.
Post by bigdog
learned that in the class I took to qualify for a concealed carry permit.
Deadly force is only authorized if one is in danger of death or great
bodily harm (rape is considered great bodily harm). In my state, I am
allowed to intervene with deadly force on behalf of a third party only if
that third party would have been justified in using deadly force. If I
don't know the particulars of an incident, I place myself in legal
jeopardy if I intervene with deadly force. For example, suppose I see
someone beating another person to a pulp with a tire iron and I used
deadly force to stop him. Deadly force is not justified if the person
using deadly force initiated a confrontation. If it turns out the guy
getting beaten to death started the altercation by punching the other guy
in the mouth, he would not be justified in using deadly force to thwart
his attacker and I would not be justified in using deadly force on his
behalf. That is why the attorney who presented the laws to our class
recommended we not intervene with deadly force on behalf of another.
I should point out that Ohio has some of the strictest laws in the country
regarding use of deadly force. In most states, the use of deadly force
would be justified under the above scenario. It varies from state to state
but as long as the use of deadly force was based on a reasonable judgement
it would be justified.
Post by claviger
There is actually an interesting precedent for this option. At one time
the Mafia controlled Las Vegas and New Orleans. They would not tolerate
any harm or hassle to the tourists, who were safe 24 hrs a day in both
cities. At one time Las Vegas was known as the safest city in America and
for that reason the most Fun City in America. Old Timers say both cities
are not as safe or fun as in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. That could change if
US Cities contracted directly with the Mafia and established a modern
codependent relationship.
Interestingly enough, the protection racket actually began when citizens
paid a fee to the Mafia to protect them from other criminals. There were
some who chose not to pay for that protection so the Mafia upped the ante
by giving citizens reason to fear.
Post by claviger
Some historians and professors of sociology are concerned with the fraying
bonds of national identity and adhesion to societal norms. The new normal
is no more unifying normality. That means new patterns of behavior and
templates for coexistence must be found to replace disintegration of mores
from the past. One possibility is drug culture will be a unifying
influence in certain parts of the national landscape. People will
willingly do what they like, believe in, and take pleasure in.
As a libertarian, I believe any adult should have the right to ingest any
substance into his/her body that they choose. I would end the drug war and
legalize all narcotics. I draw the line when it comes to minors. Society
can and should protect them from their self destructive impulses and
anyone selling harmful substances to them should be dealt with harshly by
the law. As for adults engaging in voluntary transactions, I think the
government should butt out.
Post by claviger
Another changing dynamic is the old fashioned work ethic that seems to be
less popular with native born Americans but alive and well with newcomers
from other parts of the world. Nature favors the strong and this reality
will determine success to any group that understands and uses it to
enhance monetary inflow and wealth accumulation.
Individual responsibility is another of the basic tenants of
libertarianism. The government owes us nothing other than to secure our
fundamental rights. According to the Declaration of Independence, that is
the reason governments are instituted among men.
Post by claviger
One thing I noticed recently is tree companies used to be mostly new
arrivals from Mexico. Now those companies are still owned by Mexicans but
the new workers are from Honduras. From experience I know Mexicans are
very good workers, very methodical at an even pace and can take care of
two jobs a day, which is a lot of hard work with heavy pulling and
lifting. Today I watched a crew in my neighborhood take down a large old
tree and found out 3/4 were from Honduras and asked them how many
customers they had left, and they told me 3 more! I couldn't believe they
can do 4 a day!! They reacted like no problema and want the dinero. So
Mexican workers now have competition from the Hondurans, the poorest
country in Central America. They seemed to be a happy bunch and
appreciate the opportunity for mas dinero. Once again the profit motive
is the key factor for success. Their attitude is get out of the way and
let me work! They did an excellent job.
Capitalism is based on the premise that society works best when people are
allowed to act in their own self interest. In doing so, they provide
benefit to society as a whole. Regardless of their nationality, the people
doing the tree work aren't doing so for the benefit of their customers.
They are doing it for their own benefit. They earn a living by providing a
service to their customers and their customers benefit from their efforts.
bigdog
2018-09-19 04:10:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Unable to convict him for murder, a federal charge was brought against
him for violating the victim's civil rights.
A Right to Auto Theft? Have Liberals added that to the Bill of Rights?
A right to life.
A right to a life of crime?
Why would you add crime to what I wrote? The victim had a right to life
and the cop violated that right.
In his mind the car thief had a right to crime. The victim was the owner
of the car. Both had a right to life under US Law.
What the thief had in mind is irrelevant to the criminal action taken by
the cop. The fact he broke the law in no way justified the use of deadly
force.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
The cop got what he deserved. His victim did not.
Under US and State Law yes. Not in other countries. The victim was
a thief who victimized other people.
He was still a victim and the cop had no right to shoot him. The law gives
very specific guidelines as to when deadly force is justified and it
wasn't remotely justified in this case. The fact that the thief was wrong
does nothing to make the cop's actions justified. That cop is going to be
caged for a long time and he should be.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
This shooting should never have happened. The remaining witness would ID
the guy. Car theft is a dangerous profession. What if he stole a Mafia car?
A single bullet to the head would be a blessing if that was the case.
It neither justifies the murder nor is it a mitigating factor.
We're talking about OC. They operate by a different set of rules.
You are talking about a hypothetical. I am talking about what happened.
Under US Legal system the OC ignores. Killing a car thief under the
OC system is acceptable and SOP.
That is irrelevant to the case we are discussing.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Another myth is that cops jobs are especially dangerous.
Do you wear a bullet proof vest to work? I don't either. They do.
Not standard equipment. It is for SWAT. In some situations the regular
cops might don them but they typical do not wear them.
Standard equipment where I live.
Post by bigdog
It lists just the top ten. There are some differences but cops don't make
the top ten in either list. Going by your list, we can see that there are
jobs that are far more dangerous that pay a lot less than what cops make.
I'd say they are well compensated. I am not saying cops jobs aren't
dangerous. My problem is when people use that danger as an excuse for
abhorrent behavior. Would you be willing to excuse a logger who murdered
somebody while on the job because his job is dangerous? So why are people
willing to do that for cops? We are as a society far too deferential to
cops. We need to hold them accountable when they act out of line and we
don't do that.
To say being a Police Officer is not a dangerous occupation is ridiculous.
Yes it is and I never said that. Don't start acting like Marsh. I pointed
out that there are many jobs more dangerous than being a cop and some
don't pay nearly as well as cops are paid. My problem is when people use
the danger associated with the job to excuse criminal behavior by cops.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
We saw that play out in the Parkland school massacre when the school's
resource officer as well as several of his fellow deputies refused to enter
the school while the shooting was going on. When the city police arrived
they took action but by then it was too late.
The Deputies were ordered to hold their position. Nobody knows why.
The Teachers and Parents demand to know why.
They had no duty to intervene. The school resource officer who was on duty
when the shooting started declined to enter the building and expose
himself to danger.
What is a resource officer? If there was no danger then no need for
a security officer. A security officer is there to confront danger.
A school resource officer is one assigned by his department to work at a
school. They are there to help maintain order. This explains it better than
I could.
Don't understand the title "resource officer". Does he/she do security or
not?
Did you read the link I provided. It explains the duties quite well.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
http://ezinearticles.com/?Duties,-Responsibilities-of-School-Resource-Officer&id=4348599
At Parkland, the school resource officer was an armed and uniformed
officer with full police powers. He could have entered the building and
confronted the shooter but chose not to. He seemed more concerned with
protecting his own life than that of the students in harm's way. That was
his choice. The law doesn't require him to protect the public. What the
incident illustrates is that not all cops are heroes. Some are. Some
aren't. Some would have risked their lives to save those students being
slaughtered. I wouldn't hazard a guess as to the percentage.
What law? Does the school district require any response to deadly attack?
School districts don't make laws. Legislatures do.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
A similar situation occurred at the Orlando night club shooting. An off
duty officer had been hired to provide security. When the shooting started
he fled the premises and called for back up. Two uniformed officer arrived
and the three of them entered the building, only to retreat when they saw
what they were up against, a single gunman with a semi-automatic rifle.
That is disappointing. If they spread out seems like one of them
could hit the target. Did they realize there was only one gunman?>
Once again, they were not required by law to provide protection to those
being murdered. They were free to choose risk their lives to save others
and chose not to. Clearly they were no heroes.
When hired by a nightclub what is their job description?
That's between them and the nightclub operator. A cop is has a duty to
respond to a crime even while off duty. They are expected to act as if
they are on duty. That's why they carry their piece even when off duty. In
this case, the off duty cop responded by calling for back up and when the
three of them determined it was too dangerous a situation, they called for
SWAT rather than putting their own lives at risk.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
They called SWAT to deal with the situation.
SWAT are police officers too.
Yes they are and in dangerous situations they don full body armor and go
in with overwhelming force. That is reasonable. The problem is by waiting
for SWAT rather than dealing with the situation themselves, a lot more
people died because of the inaction by the first responders.
So what is the solution to the problem?
Hiring cops with courage. That doesn't seem to be a prerequisite. Of
course it would be hard to determine that in advance.
claviger
2018-09-20 03:33:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Unable to convict him for murder, a federal charge was brought against
him for violating the victim's civil rights.
A Right to Auto Theft? Have Liberals added that to the Bill of Rights?
A right to life.
A right to a life of crime?
Why would you add crime to what I wrote? The victim had a right to life
and the cop violated that right.
In his mind the car thief had a right to crime. The victim was the owner
of the car. Both had a right to life under US Law.
What the thief had in mind is irrelevant to the criminal action taken by
the cop. The fact he broke the law in no way justified the use of deadly
force.
In a previous era the Police would yell "Stop or I'll shoot!"
Sometimes they would fire a warning shot up in the air or
into the ground. I'm guessing that is not allowed either.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
The cop got what he deserved. His victim did not.
Under US and State Law yes. Not in other countries.
The victim was a thief who victimized other people.
He was still a victim and the cop had no right to shoot him.
The law gives very specific guidelines as to when deadly force
is justified and it wasn't remotely justified in this case. The fact
that the thief was wrong does nothing to make the cop's actions
justified. That cop is going to be caged for a long time and he
should be.
Sometimes the Mafia will hire ex-cops like this one.
Old saying, "If you can't whip 'em, then join 'em!"
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Under US Legal system the OC ignores. Killing a car thief
under the OC system is acceptable and SOP.
That is irrelevant to the case we are discussing.
A comparison of enforcement methodology.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
To say being a Police Officer is not a dangerous occupation is ridiculous.
Yes it is and I never said that. Don't start acting like Marsh. I pointed
out that there are many jobs more dangerous than being a cop and some
don't pay nearly as well as cops are paid. My problem is when people use
the danger associated with the job to excuse criminal behavior by cops.
Rules are Rules and must be followed or there is chaos. By breaking
the rules of engagement he made the whole department look bad.

Just curious, if a Police Officer witnessed a car thief shoot the owner
and then saw him coming to the scene and runs away is the officer allowed
to shoot at him as a fleeing murderer?
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
What law? Does the school district require any response
to deadly attack?
School districts don't make laws. Legislatures do.
School districts make rules and guidelines, and as adults in authority
responsible for the safety of many students so I would think they do have
influence, as do parents who entrust their children to the care and safety
of adult supervision. As such the School District is an integral part of
the system.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
A similar situation occurred at the Orlando night club shooting. An off
duty officer had been hired to provide security. When the shooting started
he fled the premises and called for back up. Two uniformed officer arrived
and the three of them entered the building, only to retreat when they saw
what they were up against, a single gunman with a semi-automatic rifle.
That is disappointing. If they spread out seems like one of them
could hit the target. Did they realize there was only one gunman?>
Once again, they were not required by law to provide protection to those
being murdered. They were free to choose risk their lives to save others
and chose not to. Clearly they were no heroes.
Is the word hero in a cop's job description? Firefighters have the
responsibility to put out the fire. Do police have responsibility to put
out a different kind of fire, the kind that comes out the barrel of a gun?
If hero is not in their job title and fighting fire with fire puts them in
a liability situation if one of their bullets hits an innocent victim,
then maybe they should not engage this situation as heroes only to be sued
for injuring a bystander.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
When hired by a nightclub what is their job description?
That's between them and the nightclub operator. A cop is has a duty to
respond to a crime even while off duty. They are expected to act as if
they are on duty. That's why they carry their piece even when off duty. In
this case, the off duty cop responded by calling for back up and when the
three of them determined it was too dangerous a situation, they called for
SWAT rather than putting their own lives at risk.
Do you blame them for their reaction to this deadly situation?
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
They called SWAT to deal with the situation.
SWAT are police officers too.
Yes they are and in dangerous situations they don full body armor and go
in with overwhelming force. That is reasonable. The problem is by waiting
for SWAT rather than dealing with the situation themselves, a lot more
people died because of the inaction by the first responders.
So what is the solution to the problem?
Hiring cops with courage. That doesn't seem to be a prerequisite.
Of course it would be hard to determine that in advance.
What happens when all the old Cops with courage have retired
and the new generation of cops have a very different attitude
of self preservation and danger management?
bigdog
2018-09-21 01:18:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Unable to convict him for murder, a federal charge was brought against
him for violating the victim's civil rights.
A Right to Auto Theft? Have Liberals added that to the Bill of Rights?
A right to life.
A right to a life of crime?
Why would you add crime to what I wrote? The victim had a right to life
and the cop violated that right.
In his mind the car thief had a right to crime. The victim was the owner
of the car. Both had a right to life under US Law.
What the thief had in mind is irrelevant to the criminal action taken by
the cop. The fact he broke the law in no way justified the use of deadly
force.
In a previous era the Police would yell "Stop or I'll shoot!"
Sometimes they would fire a warning shot up in the air or
into the ground. I'm guessing that is not allowed either.
Neither the command to "Stop or I'll shoot" or the firing of a warning
shot would justify the use of deadly force if the perp refused to stop.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
The cop got what he deserved. His victim did not.
Under US and State Law yes. Not in other countries.
The victim was a thief who victimized other people.
He was still a victim and the cop had no right to shoot him.
The law gives very specific guidelines as to when deadly force
is justified and it wasn't remotely justified in this case. The fact
that the thief was wrong does nothing to make the cop's actions
justified. That cop is going to be caged for a long time and he
should be.
Sometimes the Mafia will hire ex-cops like this one.
Old saying, "If you can't whip 'em, then join 'em!"
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Under US Legal system the OC ignores. Killing a car thief
under the OC system is acceptable and SOP.
That is irrelevant to the case we are discussing.
A comparison of enforcement methodology.
Society has no control over how OC deals with a situation. It does have a
say in how it's police forces operate.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
To say being a Police Officer is not a dangerous occupation is ridiculous.
Yes it is and I never said that. Don't start acting like Marsh. I pointed
out that there are many jobs more dangerous than being a cop and some
don't pay nearly as well as cops are paid. My problem is when people use
the danger associated with the job to excuse criminal behavior by cops.
Rules are Rules and must be followed or there is chaos. By breaking
the rules of engagement he made the whole department look bad.
Just curious, if a Police Officer witnessed a car thief shoot the owner
and then saw him coming to the scene and runs away is the officer allowed
to shoot at him as a fleeing murderer?
It is a judgement call but having witnessed the perp shoot a citizen would
seem to me to provide probable cause that the perp posed an imminent
threat to the public.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
What law? Does the school district require any response
to deadly attack?
School districts don't make laws. Legislatures do.
School districts make rules and guidelines, and as adults in authority
responsible for the safety of many students so I would think they do have
influence, as do parents who entrust their children to the care and safety
of adult supervision. As such the School District is an integral part of
the system.
There are differences between rules and regulations and laws. The former
don't trump the latter.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
A similar situation occurred at the Orlando night club shooting. An off
duty officer had been hired to provide security. When the shooting started
he fled the premises and called for back up. Two uniformed officer arrived
and the three of them entered the building, only to retreat when they saw
what they were up against, a single gunman with a semi-automatic rifle.
That is disappointing. If they spread out seems like one of them
could hit the target. Did they realize there was only one gunman?>
Once again, they were not required by law to provide protection to those
being murdered. They were free to choose risk their lives to save others
and chose not to. Clearly they were no heroes.
Is the word hero in a cop's job description? Firefighters have the
responsibility to put out the fire. Do police have responsibility to put
out a different kind of fire, the kind that comes out the barrel of a gun?
If hero is not in their job title and fighting fire with fire puts them in
a liability situation if one of their bullets hits an innocent victim,
then maybe they should not engage this situation as heroes only to be sued
for injuring a bystander.
Maybe they should just follow the laws regarding the use of deadly force.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
When hired by a nightclub what is their job description?
That's between them and the nightclub operator. A cop is has a duty to
respond to a crime even while off duty. They are expected to act as if
they are on duty. That's why they carry their piece even when off duty. In
this case, the off duty cop responded by calling for back up and when the
three of them determined it was too dangerous a situation, they called for
SWAT rather than putting their own lives at risk.
Do you blame them for their reaction to this deadly situation?
I don't blame them but at the same time I don't regard them as heroes
because they did not act heroically. To me a hero is someone who acts
above and beyond the call of duty. These three did not. I wonder how many
cops would have.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
They called SWAT to deal with the situation.
SWAT are police officers too.
Yes they are and in dangerous situations they don full body armor and go
in with overwhelming force. That is reasonable. The problem is by waiting
for SWAT rather than dealing with the situation themselves, a lot more
people died because of the inaction by the first responders.
So what is the solution to the problem?
Hiring cops with courage. That doesn't seem to be a prerequisite.
Of course it would be hard to determine that in advance.
What happens when all the old Cops with courage have retired
and the new generation of cops have a very different attitude
of self preservation and danger management?
I don't think it has anything to do with age. I don't think younger cops
are any better or any worse than cops from prior generations. Some will
act heroically. Others will not. It's anyone's guess as to what the
percentages are.
claviger
2018-09-21 21:00:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
What happens when all the old Cops with courage have retired
and the new generation of cops have a very different attitude
of self preservation and danger management?
I don't think it has anything to do with age. I don't think younger cops
are any better or any worse than cops from prior generations. Some
will act heroically. Others will not. It's anyone's guess as to what the
percentages are.
Here is what concerns me about policing in the USA, based on the mass
shooting you mentioned about the nightclub with an automatic weapon. A
brave young police officer enters the building and realizes the shooter is
firing at the crowd on the left side of the room. The rookie PD officer
instinctively circles to the right side of the room and takes a position
to open fire on the shooter murdering innocent people.

The perp hears shots coming from the opposite direction and then starts
spraying that side of the room wounding and killing more innocent people.
Finally the young PO makes a lucky shot that drops this mass murderer. The
PO did his/her job as best they could do under the circumstances. To most
people this officer is a hero, but not to all.

A few days later this brave young officer is served with a dozen lawsuits
complaining the gunfire from this officer attracted the attention of the
mass murderer who turned to spay that side of the room wounding and
killing more patrons, therefore the proximal cause of these serious
injuries and wrongful death was the PO who opened fire causing return fire
by the perp. The allegations are these people might have been safe had the
officer not fired attracting attention of the shooter who was focusing on
the other side of the room at the time, therefore this police officer is
guilty of reckless endangerment to the wounded patrons.

The City Attorneys decide to settle for a million dollars rather that
defend each individual complaint in front of multiple juries. To mollify
the injured victims they fire the young PO and send a letter of apology
for the rash behavior of this inexperienced officer. In the meantime other
patrons have filed lawsuits because the other police officers did not act
with a sense of urgency to put a stop to the carnage, therefore their
negligence caused serious harm and death to several patrons plus emotional
trauma for the rest of their lives.

How would you advise this Police Department to retrain police officers to
react in a future situation like this one?
bigdog
2018-09-23 00:00:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
What happens when all the old Cops with courage have retired
and the new generation of cops have a very different attitude
of self preservation and danger management?
I don't think it has anything to do with age. I don't think younger cops
are any better or any worse than cops from prior generations. Some
will act heroically. Others will not. It's anyone's guess as to what the
percentages are.
Here is what concerns me about policing in the USA, based on the mass
shooting you mentioned about the nightclub with an automatic weapon.
The Orlando nightclub shooter did not have an automatic weapon. It was a
SEMI-automatic weapon. This is an important distinction. Fully automatic
weapons are tightly regulated and none manufactured after 1986 are legal
to own by civilians. Despite claims be liberals, the semi-automatic
sporting rifles are NOT assault rifles. Assault rifles are by definition
select fire weapons which means they are capable for being fired in fully
automatic mode. A semi-automatic weapon will fire only one round with each
pull of the trigger. They cannot spray an area with lead. Fully automatic
weapons fire at rates of 600 rpm and up. Semi-autos can only fire as fast
as one can squeeze the trigger and that does not allow the shooter to aim
his weapon with each shot.

The 3 cops who entered the building and then retreated most likely had
semi-automatic handguns because those have become the standard issue among
police forces. The semi-auto rifle would have been a more powerful weapon
because of the bullet velocity but in close quarters 3 semi-auto handguns
would be superior to a single semi-auto rifle. Yes, it would have been
dangerous for those 3 cops to confront that shooter with their handguns
but that is what heroes would have done. Those cops were no heroes.

A
Post by claviger
brave young police officer enters the building and realizes the shooter is
firing at the crowd on the left side of the room. The rookie PD officer
instinctively circles to the right side of the room and takes a position
to open fire on the shooter murdering innocent people.
Cops take training to determine good guys from bad guys. In the old days
they would go through an obstacle course with images of good guys and bad
guys popping up and they must make a quick decision as to whether to fire
or not. Today they use simulators to accomplish the same thing. Anytime a
cop is forced to fire in a place where there are innocent bystanders there
is going to be a danger but the greater danger in such a situation is in
not firing and allowing the perp to continue to take innocent lives. Cops
are expected to make reasonable judgments in such situations.
Post by claviger
The perp hears shots coming from the opposite direction and then starts
spraying that side of the room wounding and killing more innocent people.
You cannot spray with a semi-auto weapon.
Post by claviger
Finally the young PO makes a lucky shot that drops this mass murderer. The
PO did his/her job as best they could do under the circumstances. To most
people this officer is a hero, but not to all.
He would be in my eyes but the cops in Orlando chose discretion over valor.
Post by claviger
A few days later this brave young officer is served with a dozen lawsuits
complaining the gunfire from this officer attracted the attention of the
mass murderer who turned to spay that side of the room wounding and
killing more patrons, therefore the proximal cause of these serious
injuries and wrongful death was the PO who opened fire causing return fire
by the perp. The allegations are these people might have been safe had the
officer not fired attracting attention of the shooter who was focusing on
the other side of the room at the time, therefore this police officer is
guilty of reckless endangerment to the wounded patrons.
Anybody can sue anyone for anything. Whether the lawsuits have merit is
for the courts to decide.
Post by claviger
The City Attorneys decide to settle for a million dollars rather that
defend each individual complaint in front of multiple juries. To mollify
the injured victims they fire the young PO and send a letter of apology
for the rash behavior of this inexperienced officer. In the meantime other
patrons have filed lawsuits because the other police officers did not act
with a sense of urgency to put a stop to the carnage, therefore their
negligence caused serious harm and death to several patrons plus emotional
trauma for the rest of their lives.
The police union would undoubtedly come to the officer's defense.
Collective bargaining agreements specify how such conflicts are resolved,
perhaps through an arbiter or perhaps through the courts. There will
always be the possibility of lawsuits no matter how a cop acts. As long as
the cop has acted according to both the law and the rules and regulations
of his department, he should be on solid ground.
Post by claviger
How would you advise this Police Department to retrain police officers to
react in a future situation like this one?
Since Columbine, the protocol is for officers to confront the shooter
ASAP. At Columbine, the cops first established a perimeter and then
assessed before entering the building. Meanwhile, kids were getting killed
inside and a teacher bled to death. The expectation is for the officer to
act immediately but we have seen cases where they have chosen not to, such
as Orlando and Parkland. The resource officer at Parkland was pressured
into resigning although he was able to do so with full retirement
benefits. I am unaware of the officers at Orlando facing any disciplinary
action for their decision to wait for SWAT.
Anthony Marsh
2018-09-24 17:07:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
What happens when all the old Cops with courage have retired
and the new generation of cops have a very different attitude
of self preservation and danger management?
I don't think it has anything to do with age. I don't think younger cops
are any better or any worse than cops from prior generations. Some
will act heroically. Others will not. It's anyone's guess as to what the
percentages are.
Here is what concerns me about policing in the USA, based on the mass
shooting you mentioned about the nightclub with an automatic weapon.
The Orlando nightclub shooter did not have an automatic weapon. It was a
SEMI-automatic weapon. This is an important distinction. Fully automatic
Brilliant tactic. Let's get sidetracked and quibble about the rate of
fire. Like the difference between 8 rounds per second and 15 rounds per
seconds. Ask the victims if it makes any difference to them when they're
dead.
Post by bigdog
weapons are tightly regulated and none manufactured after 1986 are legal
to own by civilians. Despite claims be liberals, the semi-automatic
sporting rifles are NOT assault rifles. Assault rifles are by definition
select fire weapons which means they are capable for being fired in fully
automatic mode. A semi-automatic weapon will fire only one round with each
pull of the trigger. They cannot spray an area with lead. Fully automatic
weapons fire at rates of 600 rpm and up. Semi-autos can only fire as fast
as one can squeeze the trigger and that does not allow the shooter to aim
his weapon with each shot.
The 3 cops who entered the building and then retreated most likely had
semi-automatic handguns because those have become the standard issue among
police forces. The semi-auto rifle would have been a more powerful weapon
because of the bullet velocity but in close quarters 3 semi-auto handguns
would be superior to a single semi-auto rifle. Yes, it would have been
dangerous for those 3 cops to confront that shooter with their handguns
but that is what heroes would have done. Those cops were no heroes.
A
Post by claviger
brave young police officer enters the building and realizes the shooter is
firing at the crowd on the left side of the room. The rookie PD officer
instinctively circles to the right side of the room and takes a position
to open fire on the shooter murdering innocent people.
Cops take training to determine good guys from bad guys. In the old days
they would go through an obstacle course with images of good guys and bad
guys popping up and they must make a quick decision as to whether to fire
or not. Today they use simulators to accomplish the same thing. Anytime a
cop is forced to fire in a place where there are innocent bystanders there
is going to be a danger but the greater danger in such a situation is in
not firing and allowing the perp to continue to take innocent lives. Cops
are expected to make reasonable judgments in such situations.
Post by claviger
The perp hears shots coming from the opposite direction and then starts
spraying that side of the room wounding and killing more innocent people.
You cannot spray with a semi-auto weapon.
Post by claviger
Finally the young PO makes a lucky shot that drops this mass murderer. The
PO did his/her job as best they could do under the circumstances. To most
people this officer is a hero, but not to all.
He would be in my eyes but the cops in Orlando chose discretion over valor.
Post by claviger
A few days later this brave young officer is served with a dozen lawsuits
complaining the gunfire from this officer attracted the attention of the
mass murderer who turned to spay that side of the room wounding and
killing more patrons, therefore the proximal cause of these serious
injuries and wrongful death was the PO who opened fire causing return fire
by the perp. The allegations are these people might have been safe had the
officer not fired attracting attention of the shooter who was focusing on
the other side of the room at the time, therefore this police officer is
guilty of reckless endangerment to the wounded patrons.
Anybody can sue anyone for anything. Whether the lawsuits have merit is
for the courts to decide.
Post by claviger
The City Attorneys decide to settle for a million dollars rather that
defend each individual complaint in front of multiple juries. To mollify
the injured victims they fire the young PO and send a letter of apology
for the rash behavior of this inexperienced officer. In the meantime other
patrons have filed lawsuits because the other police officers did not act
with a sense of urgency to put a stop to the carnage, therefore their
negligence caused serious harm and death to several patrons plus emotional
trauma for the rest of their lives.
The police union would undoubtedly come to the officer's defense.
Collective bargaining agreements specify how such conflicts are resolved,
perhaps through an arbiter or perhaps through the courts. There will
always be the possibility of lawsuits no matter how a cop acts. As long as
the cop has acted according to both the law and the rules and regulations
of his department, he should be on solid ground.
Post by claviger
How would you advise this Police Department to retrain police officers to
react in a future situation like this one?
Since Columbine, the protocol is for officers to confront the shooter
ASAP. At Columbine, the cops first established a perimeter and then
assessed before entering the building. Meanwhile, kids were getting killed
inside and a teacher bled to death. The expectation is for the officer to
act immediately but we have seen cases where they have chosen not to, such
as Orlando and Parkland. The resource officer at Parkland was pressured
into resigning although he was able to do so with full retirement
benefits. I am unaware of the officers at Orlando facing any disciplinary
action for their decision to wait for SWAT.
Anthony Marsh
2018-09-22 14:07:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Unable to convict him for murder, a federal charge was brought against
him for violating the victim's civil rights.
A Right to Auto Theft? Have Liberals added that to the Bill of Rights?
A right to life.
A right to a life of crime?
Why would you add crime to what I wrote? The victim had a right to life
and the cop violated that right.
In his mind the car thief had a right to crime. The victim was the owner
of the car. Both had a right to life under US Law.
What the thief had in mind is irrelevant to the criminal action taken by
the cop. The fact he broke the law in no way justified the use of deadly
force.
In a previous era the Police would yell "Stop or I'll shoot!"
Sometimes they would fire a warning shot up in the air or
into the ground. I'm guessing that is not allowed either.
Neither the command to "Stop or I'll shoot" or the firing of a warning
shot would justify the use of deadly force if the perp refused to stop.
NYPD means I will knock your punk ass down. (Men in Black)
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
The cop got what he deserved. His victim did not.
Under US and State Law yes. Not in other countries.
The victim was a thief who victimized other people.
He was still a victim and the cop had no right to shoot him.
The law gives very specific guidelines as to when deadly force
is justified and it wasn't remotely justified in this case. The fact
that the thief was wrong does nothing to make the cop's actions
justified. That cop is going to be caged for a long time and he
should be.
Sometimes the Mafia will hire ex-cops like this one.
Old saying, "If you can't whip 'em, then join 'em!"
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Under US Legal system the OC ignores. Killing a car thief
under the OC system is acceptable and SOP.
That is irrelevant to the case we are discussing.
A comparison of enforcement methodology.
Society has no control over how OC deals with a situation. It does have a
say in how it's police forces operate.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
To say being a Police Officer is not a dangerous occupation is ridiculous.
Yes it is and I never said that. Don't start acting like Marsh. I pointed
out that there are many jobs more dangerous than being a cop and some
don't pay nearly as well as cops are paid. My problem is when people use
the danger associated with the job to excuse criminal behavior by cops.
Rules are Rules and must be followed or there is chaos. By breaking
the rules of engagement he made the whole department look bad.
Just curious, if a Police Officer witnessed a car thief shoot the owner
and then saw him coming to the scene and runs away is the officer allowed
to shoot at him as a fleeing murderer?
It is a judgement call but having witnessed the perp shoot a citizen would
seem to me to provide probable cause that the perp posed an imminent
threat to the public.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
What law? Does the school district require any response
to deadly attack?
School districts don't make laws. Legislatures do.
School districts make rules and guidelines, and as adults in authority
responsible for the safety of many students so I would think they do have
influence, as do parents who entrust their children to the care and safety
of adult supervision. As such the School District is an integral part of
the system.
There are differences between rules and regulations and laws. The former
don't trump the latter.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
A similar situation occurred at the Orlando night club shooting. An off
duty officer had been hired to provide security. When the shooting started
he fled the premises and called for back up. Two uniformed officer arrived
and the three of them entered the building, only to retreat when they saw
what they were up against, a single gunman with a semi-automatic rifle.
That is disappointing. If they spread out seems like one of them
could hit the target. Did they realize there was only one gunman?>
Once again, they were not required by law to provide protection to those
being murdered. They were free to choose risk their lives to save others
and chose not to. Clearly they were no heroes.
Is the word hero in a cop's job description? Firefighters have the
responsibility to put out the fire. Do police have responsibility to put
out a different kind of fire, the kind that comes out the barrel of a gun?
If hero is not in their job title and fighting fire with fire puts them in
a liability situation if one of their bullets hits an innocent victim,
then maybe they should not engage this situation as heroes only to be sued
for injuring a bystander.
Maybe they should just follow the laws regarding the use of deadly force.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
When hired by a nightclub what is their job description?
That's between them and the nightclub operator. A cop is has a duty to
respond to a crime even while off duty. They are expected to act as if
they are on duty. That's why they carry their piece even when off duty. In
this case, the off duty cop responded by calling for back up and when the
three of them determined it was too dangerous a situation, they called for
SWAT rather than putting their own lives at risk.
Do you blame them for their reaction to this deadly situation?
I don't blame them but at the same time I don't regard them as heroes
because they did not act heroically. To me a hero is someone who acts
above and beyond the call of duty. These three did not. I wonder how many
cops would have.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
They called SWAT to deal with the situation.
SWAT are police officers too.
Yes they are and in dangerous situations they don full body armor and go
in with overwhelming force. That is reasonable. The problem is by waiting
for SWAT rather than dealing with the situation themselves, a lot more
people died because of the inaction by the first responders.
So what is the solution to the problem?
Hiring cops with courage. That doesn't seem to be a prerequisite.
Of course it would be hard to determine that in advance.
What happens when all the old Cops with courage have retired
and the new generation of cops have a very different attitude
of self preservation and danger management?
I don't think it has anything to do with age. I don't think younger cops
are any better or any worse than cops from prior generations. Some will
act heroically. Others will not. It's anyone's guess as to what the
percentages are.
I uploaded the video by Sacha Baron Cohen, but obviously McAdams won't let
you see it, because he shows how stupid the extreme rightwingers are.
claviger
2018-09-23 19:24:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
I uploaded the video by Sacha Baron Cohen, but obviously McAdams won't let
you see it, because he shows how stupid the extreme rightwingers are.
They are smart enough to know Socialism is a complete scam. Socialism
started WWII where millions of innocent people died. Modern Russia dumped
socialism for one simple reason: it doesn't work. It brought lifelong
poverty to Cuba and in the process of destroying Venezuela. Caracas is
the most beautiful city situated in a long narrow valley and has the most
beautiful office buildings I've ever seen. Wonder if they are empty like
the new socialist economy that destroyed so many jobs? One news report
said the country only gets 4 hours a day of electric power. How do you run
an economy on that? What about the schools? What about the hospitals?
Anthony Marsh
2018-09-21 14:58:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Unable to convict him for murder, a federal charge was brought against
him for violating the victim's civil rights.
A Right to Auto Theft? Have Liberals added that to the Bill of Rights?
A right to life.
A right to a life of crime?
Why would you add crime to what I wrote? The victim had a right to life
and the cop violated that right.
In his mind the car thief had a right to crime. The victim was the owner
of the car. Both had a right to life under US Law.
What the thief had in mind is irrelevant to the criminal action taken by
the cop. The fact he broke the law in no way justified the use of deadly
force.
In a previous era the Police would yell "Stop or I'll shoot!"
Sometimes they would fire a warning shot up in the air or
into the ground. I'm guessing that is not allowed either.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
The cop got what he deserved. His victim did not.
Under US and State Law yes. Not in other countries.
The victim was a thief who victimized other people.
He was still a victim and the cop had no right to shoot him.
The law gives very specific guidelines as to when deadly force
is justified and it wasn't remotely justified in this case. The fact
that the thief was wrong does nothing to make the cop's actions
justified. That cop is going to be caged for a long time and he
should be.
Sometimes the Mafia will hire ex-cops like this one.
Which one? Sometimes professional hitmen will dress up as cops.
Post by claviger
Old saying, "If you can't whip 'em, then join 'em!"
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Under US Legal system the OC ignores. Killing a car thief
under the OC system is acceptable and SOP.
That is irrelevant to the case we are discussing.
A comparison of enforcement methodology.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
To say being a Police Officer is not a dangerous occupation is ridiculous.
Yes it is and I never said that. Don't start acting like Marsh. I pointed
out that there are many jobs more dangerous than being a cop and some
don't pay nearly as well as cops are paid. My problem is when people use
the danger associated with the job to excuse criminal behavior by cops.
Rules are Rules and must be followed or there is chaos. By breaking
the rules of engagement he made the whole department look bad.
Just curious, if a Police Officer witnessed a car thief shoot the owner
and then saw him coming to the scene and runs away is the officer allowed
to shoot at him as a fleeing murderer?
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
What law? Does the school district require any response
to deadly attack?
School districts don't make laws. Legislatures do.
School districts make rules and guidelines, and as adults in authority
responsible for the safety of many students so I would think they do have
influence, as do parents who entrust their children to the care and safety
of adult supervision. As such the School District is an integral part of
the system.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
A similar situation occurred at the Orlando night club shooting. An off
duty officer had been hired to provide security. When the shooting started
he fled the premises and called for back up. Two uniformed officer arrived
and the three of them entered the building, only to retreat when they saw
what they were up against, a single gunman with a semi-automatic rifle.
That is disappointing. If they spread out seems like one of them
could hit the target. Did they realize there was only one gunman?>
Once again, they were not required by law to provide protection to those
being murdered. They were free to choose risk their lives to save others
and chose not to. Clearly they were no heroes.
Is the word hero in a cop's job description? Firefighters have the
responsibility to put out the fire. Do police have responsibility to put
out a different kind of fire, the kind that comes out the barrel of a gun?
If hero is not in their job title and fighting fire with fire puts them in
a liability situation if one of their bullets hits an innocent victim,
then maybe they should not engage this situation as heroes only to be sued
for injuring a bystander.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
When hired by a nightclub what is their job description?
That's between them and the nightclub operator. A cop is has a duty to
respond to a crime even while off duty. They are expected to act as if
they are on duty. That's why they carry their piece even when off duty. In
this case, the off duty cop responded by calling for back up and when the
three of them determined it was too dangerous a situation, they called for
SWAT rather than putting their own lives at risk.
Do you blame them for their reaction to this deadly situation?
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
They called SWAT to deal with the situation.
SWAT are police officers too.
Yes they are and in dangerous situations they don full body armor and go
in with overwhelming force. That is reasonable. The problem is by waiting
for SWAT rather than dealing with the situation themselves, a lot more
people died because of the inaction by the first responders.
So what is the solution to the problem?
Hiring cops with courage. That doesn't seem to be a prerequisite.
Of course it would be hard to determine that in advance.
What happens when all the old Cops with courage have retired
and the new generation of cops have a very different attitude
of self preservation and danger management?
Some old cops also retire and then work undercover to collect
information on the Mafia. Especially if they have an Italian or Sicilian
name.
claviger
2018-09-21 23:29:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
What happens when all the old Cops with courage have retired
and the new generation of cops have a very different attitude
of self preservation and danger management?
Some old cops also retire and then work undercover to collect
information on the Mafia. Especially if they have an Italian or Sicilian
name.
Somebody said a long time ago Italians make the best Crooks and
the best Cops. Sounds like Nature keeps things in balance.
Anthony Marsh
2018-09-18 14:58:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Unable to convict him for murder, a federal charge was brought against
him for violating the victim's civil rights.
A Right to Auto Theft? Have Liberals added that to the Bill of Rights?
A right to life.
A right to a life of crime?
Why would you add crime to what I wrote? The victim had a right to life
and the cop violated that right. The cop got what he deserved. His victim
did not.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
This shooting should never have happened. The remaining witness would ID
the guy. Car theft is a dangerous profession. What if he stole a Mafia car?
A single bullet to the head would be a blessing if that was the case.
It neither justifies the murder nor is it a mitigating factor.
We're talking about OC. They operate by a different set of rules.
You are talking about a hypothetical. I am talking about what happened.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Another myth is that cops jobs are especially dangerous.
Do you wear a bullet proof vest to work? I don't either. They do.
Not standard equipment. It is for SWAT. In some situations the regular
cops might don them but they typical do not wear them.
Our regular cops wear them all the time and I complained to Peter that
they are still using the old Kevlar. There are much better new versions
out there now.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Trash collectors have a much more dangerous job but nobody plays the
bagpipes for them when they are killed on the job. Firefighters face far
more danger. Even when they aren't seriously injured, the accumulative
effects of inhaling smoke takes a long term toll.
14. Police and sheriff???s patrol officers
Fatal injuries in 2016: 14.6 per 100,000 workers
Total: 108 fatal injuries, 28,740 nonfatal injuries
Most common accident: Intentional injury by other person
Median annual wage: $59,680
Some 108 police and sheriff???s patrol officers died in action in
2016, the most of any year since 2011 and among the most of any profession
when adjusted for the number of people in the profession. The most common
cause of death on the job were intentional shootings, which claimed the
lives of 46 officers last year. Almost as many officers died in car
accidents.
Police officers also suffered 28,740 nonfatal injuries, which required a
median of nine days off to recover ??? on day more than the national
median recovery time. Police officers often work around the clock, and
1.6% of nonfatal injuries in 2016 occurred at least 12 hours into an
officer???s shift.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/careers/2018/01/09/workplace-fatalities-25-most-dangerous-jobs-america/1002500001/
Here is another list.
https://www.bankrate.com/finance/personal-finance/10-most-dangerous-jobs-us-1.aspx#slide=11
It lists just the top ten. There are some differences but cops don't make
the top ten in either list. Going by your list, we can see that there are
jobs that are far more dangerous that pay a lot less than what cops make.
I'd say they are well compensated. I am not saying cops jobs aren't
dangerous. My problem is when people use that danger as an excuse for
abhorrent behavior. Would you be willing to excuse a logger who murdered
somebody while on the job because his job is dangerous? So why are people
willing to do that for cops? We are as a society far too deferential to
cops. We need to hold them accountable when they act out of line and we
don't do that.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
We saw that play out in the Parkland school massacre when the school's
resource officer as well as several of his fellow deputies refused to enter
the school while the shooting was going on. When the city police arrived
they took action but by then it was too late.
The Deputies were ordered to hold their position. Nobody knows why.
The Teachers and Parents demand to know why.
They had no duty to intervene. The school resource officer who was on duty
when the shooting started declined to enter the building and expose
himself to danger.
What is a resource officer? If there was no danger then no need for
a security officer. A security officer is there to confront danger.
A school resource officer is one assigned by his department to work at a school. They are there to help maintain order. This explains it better than I
could.
http://ezinearticles.com/?Duties,-Responsibilities-of-School-Resource-Officer&id=4348599
At Parkland, the school resource officer was an armed and uniformed
officer with full police powers. He could have entered the building and
confronted the shooter but chose not to. He seemed more concerned with
protecting his own life than that of the students in harm's way. That was
his choice. The law doesn't require him to protect the public. What the
incident illustrates is that not all cops are heroes. Some are. Some
aren't. Some would have risked their lives to save those students being
slaughtered. I wouldn't hazard a guess as to the percentage.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
A similar situation occurred at the Orlando night club shooting. An off
duty officer had been hired to provide security. When the shooting started
he fled the premises and called for back up. Two uniformed officer arrived
and the three of them entered the building, only to retreat when they saw
what they were up against, a single gunman with a semi-automatic rifle.
That is disappointing. If they spread out seems like one of them
could hit the target. Did they realize there was only one gunman?
Once again, they were no required by law to provide protection to those
being murdered. They were free to choose risk their lives to save others
and chose not to. Clearly they were no heroes.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
They called SWAT to deal with the situation.
SWAT are police officers too.
Yes they are and in dangerous situations they don full body armor and go
in with overwhelming force. That is reasonable. The problem is by waiting
for SWAT rather than dealing with the situation themselves, a lot more
people died because of the inaction by the first responders.
Post by claviger
Post by bigdog
It has nothing to do with political correctness. Cops have never been able
to protect people from violence. There aren't nearly enough of them to do
that.
The reason for the Second Amendment.
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
All US Citizens need to take Karate lessons.
I find my .44 Magnum and 12 gauge pump action shotguns to be much better
choices, especially against the guy who brings a knife to a gunfight. My
carry piece is a 40 S&W Glock.
Another myth is that Karate is an especially effective form of self
defense. Penn and Teller did an expose that showed the breaking of boards
and smashing of blocks is little more than a parlor trick. To be sure, any
of the martial arts are effective methods of hand-to-hand combat, but
martial artists are no better with their hands than traditional boxers.
The point of the Penn and Teller program is that being proficient in the
martial arts doesn't make somebody a super hero capable of defending one
self against multiple attackers or an armed attacker.
Another reason for the Second Amendment.
I fully support the Second Amendment. I don't vote for candidates who
don't.
Did you see Sasha Baron Cohan prank Congressmen into supporting arming
the kindergartners?

https://scroll.in/video/886760/watch-comedian-sacha-baron-cohen-dupes-us-republicans-into-backing-a-fake-programme-to-arm-toddlers
Mark
2018-09-16 21:26:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
If LHO was tricked into bringing his rifle to work then he knew
who the trickster was. He could have alerted the police and
asked for immediate protection of his wife and children. This
is all fantasy because LHO had a big ego and wanted to be a
deadly sniper like his heroes Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.
Are you really that naive or are you just joking?
You want the suspect to voluntary go to the police who are famous for
beating confessions out of innocent people? Frazier went in to talk to
Fritz and Fritz typed up a phony confession and told him to sign it or else.
You've lead a sheltered life.
If he was innocent and could lead the police to the guy who tricked him
yes that would be the proactive thing to do, unless he was part of the
conspiracy. Where was LHO standing that day watching the parade if
not in the 6th floor window?
Silly. He tried Cooperating with the police and the first thing he saw
was a cop pointing a gun at his stomach.
How did he cooperate with Police? He broke the Law by shooting at the
You ASSuME whar you haven't proved. Even a murder can cooperate with
the police and some criminals never cooperate with the police.
So how did LHO cooperate with the Dallas Police Department?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
President in a parade. Didn't seem to bother him Jackie was sitting just
inches away and had to endure the horror of seeing her husband's brains
explode.
You convict prople without a trial.
This Newsgroup is a never-ending ongoing trial of sniper and cop killer
LHO.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
If LHO wanted to cooperate he should have volunteered to go with his Boss
and the Police Officer upstairs to search the upper floors. Instead he
abandoned his job and went home to get a pistol. Your excuse is he was
trying to go back to the TSBD and shoot the sniper. Instead he shot a
neighborhood patrol officer who tried to talk with him. Why did he not ask
that Policeman for a ride back to the TSBD building?
What are you babbling about. Don't try to put words omn my mpouth.
So why did LHO not cooperate with a neighborhood DPD patrolman who
stopped to ask him some questions? Why did he shoot this DPD officer
as he got out of his marked Patrol Car?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Or do you mean cooperating as in all those black men when they raised
their hands and said DON'T SHOOT just before they got shot in the back
27 times by a white cop?
What kind of pistol has 27 bullets? I've not heard about that one.
You are not allowed to and I did not speficy just one clip.
What kind of automatic pistol are you referring to?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
are you so anti Police? Do them a favor if somebody breaks into your apt
Silly. I always support good cops.
Good cops sometimes are forced to shoot suspects who do not follow clear
instructions to ceases and desist, who instead resist arrest by attacking
the police officer responding to a request for help from a victim.
Police Officers have the right to self defense from criminal threat of
violence. The police officer is not there to be a spectator watching
someone like you trying to defend your wallet and person from bodily harm.
A cop is allowed to use deadly force to prevent death or great bodily harm
to himself or to another. Deadly force is not authorized to stop a fleeing
suspect unless the cop has probable cause to believe that suspect poses a
clear danger to the public. That South Carolina cop who shot the unarmed
man trying to run from him was not justified in his use of deadly force
and would have gotten away with it had the shooting not been recorded by a
citizen with a camera phone. The prosecutors were unable to convict him
for murder because as is usually the case there will be at least one
person on a jury who will take the cop's side no matter how clear the
evidence was that the shooting was not justified. Unable to convict him
for murder, a federal charge was brought against him for violating the
victim's civil rights. He pleaded guilty believing he would get little to
no jail time. Instead the judge dropped the hammer on him and gave him 20
years. Kudos to the judge. We need more like him.
Post by claviger
Any police officer is expected to immediately take control of the
situation not wait to see who wins the wrestling contest. Not all police
officers are built like The Incredible Hulk, so must carry batons, mace,
and a sidearm. Not all of them get to have a taser. Using tools they do
have available they are expected to defend you from a criminal threat you
can't handle.
Post by Anthony Marsh
I played in the Boston Police Band.
So what? Did you get paid?
Post by Anthony Marsh
In one of our neigboring cities, the cops were the ones who robbed
the bank and killed a co-conspirator.
So they were criminals wearing a badge? Did real cops arrest them?
Post by Anthony Marsh
In my city the Mayor's cousin was a cop and also one of the
biggest drug dealers.
Were they both involved in drug dealing? If so both are criminals
who must be prosecuted. Police Officers enforce the Law and the
Criminals break the Law, period.
That is how it is supposed to work. Sometimes the cops are the criminals.
What I find appalling is their code of silence in which cops he observe
other cops committing heinous crimes and instead of testifying against
them will protect them with their silence. The gangs have a similar code
of silence. If the cops adhere to the same code, how are they better than
the gangs.
This country needs to dispel the myth that all cops are blue knights
putting their lives on the line to keep us safe. To be sure there are cops
who act heroically but there are other cops who are no better than the
gang bangers. We need to be willing to sort them out and treat the
criminal cops as criminals.
Post by claviger
Criminals also have their own enforcement system for people who
don't follow their rules. For that reason it is best to support your
local Police Department any way you possibly can, or learn to be
a tough guy and defend yourself.
Cop's rarely stop crimes in progress. Most of the time they try to find
the person that killed you. The courts have ruled that the cops have no
legal obligation to protect civilians. We saw that play out in the
Parkland school massacre when the school's resource officer as well as
several of his fellow deputies refused to enter the school while the
shooting was going on. When the city police arrived they took action but
by then it was too late.
I don't rely on cops for my personal safety. For one they are unlikely to
be there when I need them. As the saying goes, when seconds count the cops
are just minutes away. If they do get there in time, I have no guarantee
they are going to put their lives on the line to save mine. Some would.
Some wouldn't. My personal safety is primarily my responsibility.
You're correct in that last statement. But, if your jurisdiction has a
"ride-a-long" program you should consider it. I think it would amend your
Libertarian views as you could see what cops go through on a daily basis.
Mark
Anthony Marsh
2018-09-13 13:13:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
If LHO was tricked into bringing his rifle to work then he knew
who the trickster was. He could have alerted the police and
asked for immediate protection of his wife and children. This
is all fantasy because LHO had a big ego and wanted to be a
deadly sniper like his heroes Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.
Are you really that naive or are you just joking?
You want the suspect to voluntary go to the police who are famous for
beating confessions out of innocent people? Frazier went in to talk to
Fritz and Fritz typed up a phony confession and told him to sign it or else.
You've lead a sheltered life.
If he was innocent and could lead the police to the guy who tricked him
yes that would be the proactive thing to do, unless he was part of the
conspiracy. Where was LHO standing that day watching the parade if
not in the 6th floor window?
Silly. He tried Cooperating with the police and the first thing he saw
was a cop pointing a gun at his stomach.
How did he cooperate with Police? He broke the Law by shooting at the
You ASSuME whar you haven't proved. Even a murder can cooperate with
the police and some criminals never cooperate with the police.
So how did LHO cooperate with the Dallas Police Department?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
President in a parade. Didn't seem to bother him Jackie was sitting just
inches away and had to endure the horror of seeing her husband's brains
explode.
You convict prople without a trial.
This Newsgroup is a never-ending ongoing trial of sniper and cop killer
LHO.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
If LHO wanted to cooperate he should have volunteered to go with his Boss
and the Police Officer upstairs to search the upper floors. Instead he
abandoned his job and went home to get a pistol. Your excuse is he was
trying to go back to the TSBD and shoot the sniper. Instead he shot a
neighborhood patrol officer who tried to talk with him. Why did he not ask
that Policeman for a ride back to the TSBD building?
What are you babbling about. Don't try to put words omn my mpouth.
So why did LHO not cooperate with a neighborhood DPD patrolman who
stopped to ask him some questions? Why did he shoot this DPD officer
as he got out of his marked Patrol Car?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Or do you mean cooperating as in all those black men when they raised
their hands and said DON'T SHOOT just before they got shot in the back
27 times by a white cop?
What kind of pistol has 27 bullets? I've not heard about that one.
You are not allowed to and I did not speficy just one clip.
What kind of automatic pistol are you referring to?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
are you so anti Police? Do them a favor if somebody breaks into your apt
Silly. I always support good cops.
Good cops sometimes are forced to shoot suspects who do not follow clear
instructions to ceases and desist, who instead resist arrest by attacking
the police officer responding to a request for help from a victim.
Police Officers have the right to self defense from criminal threat of
violence. The police officer is not there to be a spectator watching
someone like you trying to defend your wallet and person from bodily harm.
Any police officer is expected to immediately take control of the
situation not wait to see who wins the wrestling contest. Not all police
officers are built like The Incredible Hulk, so must carry batons, mace,
and a sidearm. Not all of them get to have a taser. Using tools they do
have available they are expected to defend you from a criminal threat you
can't handle.
Post by Anthony Marsh
I played in the Boston Police Band.
So what? Did you get paid?
YES. So what?
It puts the LIE to the notion that I hate all cops.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
In one of our neigboring cities, the cops were the ones who robbed
the bank and killed a co-conspirator.
So they were criminals wearing a badge? Did real cops arrest them?
Much later and acttually it was the FBI who figured it out. After one
cop shot and killed the other for cheating on the cut.
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
In my city the Mayor's cousin was a cop and also one of the
biggest drug dealers.
Were they both involved in drug dealing? If so both are criminals
who must be prosecuted. Police Officers enforce the Law and the
Criminals break the Law, period.
The Mayor? NO. Just his cousin. Learn English.
Post by claviger
Criminals also have their own enforcement system for people who
don't follow their rules. For that reason it is best to support your
local Police Department any way you possibly can, or learn to be
a tough guy and defend yourself.
WTF are you talking about? You want the citizens to take the law into
their own hands? BTW the local FBI office was owned by the Mafia.
Jason Burke
2018-09-07 00:55:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
If LHO was tricked into bringing his rifle to work then he knew
who the trickster was. He could have alerted the police and
asked for immediate protection of his wife and children. This
is all fantasy because LHO had a big ego and wanted to be a
deadly sniper like his heroes Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.
Are you really that naive or are you just joking?
You want the suspect to voluntary go to the police who are famous for
beating confessions out of innocent people? Frazier went in to talk to
Fritz and Fritz typed up a phony confession and told him to sign it or else.
You've lead a sheltered life.
If he was innocent and could lead the police to the guy who tricked him
yes that would be the proactive thing to do, unless he was part of the
conspiracy. Where was LHO standing that day watching the parade if
not in the 6th floor window?
Silly. He tried Cooperating with the police and the first thing he saw
was a cop pointing a gun at his stomach.
How did he cooperate with Police? He broke the Law by shooting at the
President in a parade. Didn't seem to bother him Jackie was sitting just
inches away and had to endure the horror of seeing her husband's brains
explode.
If LHO wanted to cooperate he should have volunteered to go with his Boss
and the Police Officer upstairs to search the upper floors. Instead he
abandoned his job and went home to get a pistol. Your excuse is he was
trying to go back to the TSBD and shoot the sniper. Instead he shot a
neighborhood patrol officer who tried to talk with him. Why did he not ask
that Policeman for a ride back to the TSBD building?
Post by Anthony Marsh
Or do you mean cooperating as in all those black men when they raised
their hands and said DON'T SHOOT just before they got shot in the back
27 times by a white cop?
What kind of pistol has 27 bullets? I've not heard about that one. Why
are you so anti Police? Do them a favor if somebody breaks into your apt
or mugs you on the street don't call the Blue Meanies, call Code Pink
instead.
Anthony Anthony just be glad he white.
Jason Burke
2018-08-24 18:41:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Cancel those 20 snipers and get this punk ready for the big event.
You mean the punk who missed a seated target only 120 feet away?
Yes, then put the next shot on center target from even further away.
The human target he was aiming at was identical to the silhouette
he practiced on for quals in the USMC.
So you can't even admit that Oswald missed Walker at only 120 feet away?
You know nothing about guns.
You know nothing about reality, Anthony Anthony.
Sad thing is that you KNOW you don't....
Post by Anthony Marsh
It was because the TSBD shot missed that the grassy knoll shooter had to
fire the insurance shot.
AGAIN, do you know what Maggie's Drawers means?
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-25 13:06:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jason Burke
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Cancel those 20 snipers and get this punk ready for the big event.
You mean the punk who missed a seated target only 120 feet away?
Yes, then put the next shot on center target from even further away.
The human target he was aiming at was identical to the silhouette
he practiced on for quals in the USMC.
So you can't even admit that Oswald missed Walker at only 120 feet away?
You know nothing about guns.
You know nothing about reality, Anthony Anthony.
Sad thing is that you KNOW you don't....
All you have are personal attacks. Never any facts.
Post by Jason Burke
Post by Anthony Marsh
It was because the TSBD shot missed that the grassy knoll shooter had
to fire the insurance shot.
AGAIN, do you know what Maggie's Drawers means?
bigdog
2018-08-25 20:26:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Cancel those 20 snipers and get this punk ready for the big event.
You mean the punk who missed a seated target only 120 feet away?
Yes, then put the next shot on center target from even further away.
The human target he was aiming at was identical to the silhouette
he practiced on for quals in the USMC.
So you can't even admit that Oswald missed Walker at only 120 feet away?
You know nothing about guns.
It was because the TSBD shot missed that the grassy knoll shooter had to
fire the insurance shot.
AGAIN, do you know what Maggie's Drawers means?
Marsh knows as much about guns as he does the electoral college.
Anthony Marsh
2018-08-26 22:39:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by bigdog
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by claviger
Cancel those 20 snipers and get this punk ready for the big event.
You mean the punk who missed a seated target only 120 feet away?
Yes, then put the next shot on center target from even further away.
The human target he was aiming at was identical to the silhouette
he practiced on for quals in the USMC.
So you can't even admit that Oswald missed Walker at only 120 feet away?
You know nothing about guns.
It was because the TSBD shot missed that the grassy knoll shooter had to
fire the insurance shot.
AGAIN, do you know what Maggie's Drawers means?
Marsh knows as much about guns as he does the electoral college.
All you have are insults, never any facts. I upload the documentation to
prove my facts.
Loading...