Ana the Ist
Aggressively serene!
- Feb 21, 2012
- 39,990
- 12,573
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
Were they though? Or were they in the right place to use their platform to create a dialogue?
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The circumstance is that the police were in the wrong place.
Don't be silly, you can't flush down a person unless you dissolve them in acid, and that takes hours.What if the evidence is a person they kidnapped?
What if the evidence is a person they kidnapped?
I agree...if they aren't identified by their clothing, shouting, and general manner....I too could easily shoot at a cop I had reasonably mistaken for a criminal with a battering ram and highly tactical team. That's a thing somewhere...I'm certain of it.
Yeah, but you wouldn't shoot, right? I'm sure you were trained to identify targets and what's behind them before firing....same as me.
Surely if we expect the police to make perfect split second life and death decisions and never misjudge them....we can do the same as responsible gun owners.
Dark yes, in tac gear yes, big letters POLICE where it can be easily seen yes, shouting police, police, police show your hands. What else would you have wanted them to do?
Actually, no. We should totally expect the police to be better doing their own job than a citizen, particularly when they are the instigators of the incident.
Did you read what I wrote: "... the only justifiable reason for a no-knock raid would be to save the life of someone in imminent danger."
Frankly, I find this sort of argument a little weird.
I get that your tax dollars are going to the cop....and in that sense you're paying for a service and it should perform better?
Here's the thing...are we interested in reducing the number of situations where people are going to be shot by police under questionable conditions? It's not as if the idea of knowing who you're shooting at is at all extreme or asking a lot of every gun owner. It's first day basic safety training for guns.
How would you know that the danger was imminent before going through the door?
The question is: Why are they going through the door unless they already know there is imminent danger?
America: We're the land of the free, where you can own a gun to defend yourself in your home, and where our second amendment is designed to protect against oppressive government by having a nation of gun owners who can defend themselves.
Also America: Police can smash down the door to your house without announcing who they are, in the middle of the night, and despite the shock and surprise of having people running into your home with guns, if you fail to react exactly as they tell you to, they can just shoot you.
The cognitive gymnastics required to justify both these statements as being true and reasonable are beyond me.
You should seriously work on your doublethink, then.America: We're the land of the free, where you can own a gun to defend yourself in your home, and where our second amendment is designed to protect against oppressive government by having a nation of gun owners who can defend themselves.
Also America: Police can smash down the door to your house without announcing who they are, in the middle of the night, and despite the shock and surprise of having people running into your home with guns, if you fail to react exactly as they tell you to, they can just shoot you.
The cognitive gymnastics required to justify both these statements as being true and reasonable are beyond me.
I seem to recall the fight between the good guys and bad guys goes way back and was the fodder for movies not only now but especially back in the '20's and onward as both sides took on each other in real life. Nothing has changed other than the bad guys are being offended now.American homes=war zones, delightful.
Why is Mr Locke a “bad guy”, in this case?I seem to recall the fight between the good guys and bad guys goes way back and was the fodder for movies not only now but especially back in the '20's and onward as both sides took on each other in real life. Nothing has changed other than the bad guys are being offended now.
America: We're the land of the free, where you can own a gun to defend yourself in your home, and where our second amendment is designed to protect against oppressive government by having a nation of gun owners who can defend themselves.
Also America: Police can smash down the door to your house without announcing who they are, in the middle of the night, and despite the shock and surprise of having people running into your home with guns, if you fail to react exactly as they tell you to, they can just shoot you.
The cognitive gymnastics required to justify both these statements as being true and reasonable are beyond me.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?