- Messages
- 5,146
- Reactions
- 8,824
But do we have enough for wild, unfounded conjecture?Except we don't have anywhere near the totality of the circumstances.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
But do we have enough for wild, unfounded conjecture?Except we don't have anywhere near the totality of the circumstances.
Well... ya know... most people can look at a 2X4 and recognize... "it looks like a 2X4", "It feels like a 2X4", "It smells like a 2X4"... and don't require being hit in the face with it before acknowledging, "Yup! That's a 2X4 all right!".But do we have enough for wild, unfounded conjecture?
And some people can avoid Begging The Question* and oh the absolute horrors that even one person wants actual proof of something like the premeditated state sanctioned murder that saying it was an execution impliesWell... ya know... most people can look at a 2X4 and recognize... "it looks like a 2X4", "It feels like a 2X4", "It smells like a 2X4"... and don't require being hit in the face with it before acknowledging, "Yup! That's a 2X4 all right!".
There's always gonna be one though that requires it.
How long and how many threads ago has the grammer police been holding onto that one to throw in my face??And some people can avoid Begging The Question*
I'm not gunning for a Pulitzer and you obviously understood what I meant. As the old proverb goes... "あほに取り合うばか." (Look it up)*Correct usage, look it up
Quick show of hands , who here gets annuity checks from any of the Clinton's foundations?How long and how many threads ago has the grammer police been holding onto that one to throw in my face??
Pretty weak, but if it feeds your superiority complex and helps validate your existence I ain't gonna knock ya fer it,
I'm not gunning for a Pulitzer and you obviously understood what I meant. As the old proverb goes... "あほに取り合うばか." (Look it up)
Came up with it on the fly this morning, although it is one of my linguistic pet peeves.How long and how many threads ago has the grammer police been holding onto that one to throw in my face??
Pretty weak, but if it feeds your superiority complex and helps validate your existence I ain't gonna knock ya fer it,
I'm not gunning for a Pulitzer and you obviously understood what I meant. As the old proverb goes... "あほに取り合うばか." (Look it up)
I did state that I understand that they do it for officer safety, and I'm also aware that it is fairly standard practice. My point was that it is also kind of a catch 22 if you consider the perspective of the person on the other side of the door.Even the officers covering the ring cameras is not particularly unique. There are lots and lots of videos they can be found showing that happening each year as well.
Even the totality of what has been released. Totally botched at a bare minimum.Except we don't have anywhere near the totality of the circumstances.
What is the totality that has been released?Even the totality of what has been released. Totally botched at a bare minimum.
That he was an airport manager with regular hours. That his job was not an armed position. That his travels and habits were known from surveillance. That he was investigated for alleged PAST crimes. That he possessed weapon(s) in his home. That weapons are not an easily destructible form of evidence - thus a call from work to his spouse to flush the guns would not work.What is the totality that has been released?
To include, he had no prior criminal history, none of the alleged crimes where of a violent nature nor against others, and there was no indication in the affidavit for a search warrant that he was considered violent, a threat to others or a flight risk.That he was an airport manager with regular hours. That his job was not an armed position. That his travels and habits were known from surveillance. That he was investigated for alleged PAST crimes. That he possessed weapon(s) in his home. That weapons are not an easily destructible form of evidence - thus a call from work to his spouse to flush the guns would not work.
The ATF, with multiple warrants COULD HAVE simply contacted him at work, at the grocery store, while on foot to get his mail, ANY NUMBER of places FAR less dangerous to the manager, his family AND ATF employees. They could have contacted him when he was awake and had full awareness of his surroundings, and when he would have no reason to suspect a home invasion robbery. They COULD have arranged the entire thing using good judgment, prudence and established law enforcement policies.
But did not.
The real question here is what reason did they have to execute a high risk warrant when all the released evidence we have indicates that was the worst possible way to execute this "investigation"?What is the totality that has been released?
Most federal agencies are not allowed to perform no-knock warrants, because of this reason.No knock raids should be illegal. Complete infraction of your civil rights. Its a pretty normal response to fire upon somebody who just kicked your door in at 3 in the morning. But for whatever reason they keep doing it and saying "durrr we dont know why he shot at us! We only broke his door down!" Stupid is, as stupid does. I for one know Id be doing the same thing if this happened to me, police, home invader? I dont care. You are obviously not welcome in my home if you have to kick the door down and forcefully enter you've now made your intentions clear and your right to life is null and void.
All good points, thank you. You're talking about the lead up to the search warrant. I hadn't thought about that. I was mainly thinking about the execution of the search warrant its-self.That he was an airport manager with regular hours. That his job was not an armed position. That his travels and habits were known from surveillance. That he was investigated for alleged PAST crimes. That he possessed weapon(s) in his home. That weapons are not an easily destructible form of evidence - thus a call from work to his spouse to flush the guns would not work.
The ATF, with multiple warrants COULD HAVE simply contacted him at work, at the grocery store, while on foot to get his mail, ANY NUMBER of places FAR less dangerous to the manager, his family AND ATF employees. They could have contacted him when he was awake and had full awareness of his surroundings, and when he would have no reason to suspect a home invasion robbery. They COULD have arranged the entire thing using good judgment, prudence and established law enforcement policies.
But did not.
If they pursued him in his car and he bailed and ran inside.... OK. Maybe.All good points, thank you. You're talking about the lead up to the search warrant. I hadn't thought about that. I was mainly thinking about the execution of the search warrant its-self.
You may not do that but there are plenty of folks out there that don't want to but they will stand their ground and fight back, mostly the older crowd.You're going to go all Rambo when ten vehicles full of fed's and local LEO's come a knocking?
Yeah right.