Chicken sh*t Nancy Pelosi!!!!!

[captnjak]

I stand corrected. Although I was thinking more about your typical street crimes and the resulting interaction with law enforcement.

If a black gang member did from an urban rooftop what the man pictured did from a highway overpass, all Holy Hell would have broke out. And rightly so. Yet Fox News and the like were ready to make guys like this into man of the year.

[scfire86]

WAY too many civilians refuse to cooperate in any way with the police. And WAY too many of them have no respect for the police or society's rules or fellow citizens or probably themselves. I'm not saying they should be shot. But what should the police do when civilians refuse to follow lawful requests? How can police enforce the laws we ask and expect them to enforce if we allow some citizens to pick and choose when they will cooperate? Should we only arrest the criminals who agree to be arrested? Should we only enforce violations when the defendant agrees to have the enforcement action carried out? In order to live in an orderly society we have to give up just a little bit of our personal freedoms to those we ask to protect us. That is the only way it can work. And there is no conflict with the constitution there. No conflict with common sense either.

Yet many conservatives were supporting the hayseeds who confronted law enforcement in Bunkerville, NV and recently in Burns, OR.

As far as the double standard for white and non-white armed suspects goes, is there real data backing up your claim? I feel very certain that if you pull a gun on a cop around here they will shoot you. Period. End of story. I feel like that is probably true anywhere.

Except it isn't. There was no call out of the National Guard in either NV or OR when armed individuals confronted law enforcement. There was no activation of SWAT teams in full battle dress. The double standard is obvious.

[captnjak]

Recent events involving armed white males and black males have shown a double standard in how force is used and applied.

There is a good reason why you have never felt oppressed.


Especially if the non-white suspect is unarmed or has their arms raised.

Isn't the "arms raised" part a stretch? I'm not aware of a police involved shooting where the suspects arms were raised. Brown in Ferguson MO did not have his arms raised according to the majority of eyewitnesses. I believe there may have only been one witness who claimed this. Some witnesses will lie outright in these situations. Lying witnesses are at least as common as lying cops, probably more common. We just expect more from cops. There was a high profile case in NY a while back. Two cops were shot during a buy and bust operation. A witness swore that the cops rolled up undercover and started shooting. She claimed to see it from her window. They took her to the window in question and there was ZERO line of sight to the location due to trees. FWIW both police officers were non-white, as were the criminal drug dealing cop shooters.

Unarmed suspects have definitely been shot. Tragic all around. I think unarmed people should do what they're told by armed people, whether the armed person is a police officer or not. And if you believe cops are reckless racist killers looking for someone to shoot it's even a better idea to do what you're told. This is not the time for a constitutional debate. WAY too many civilians refuse to cooperate in any way with the police. And WAY too many of them have no respect for the police or society's rules or fellow citizens or probably themselves. I'm not saying they should be shot. But what should the police do when civilians refuse to follow lawful requests? How can police enforce the laws we ask and expect them to enforce if we allow some citizens to pick and choose when they will cooperate? Should we only arrest the criminals who agree to be arrested? Should we only enforce violations when the defendant agrees to have the enforcement action carried out? In order to live in an orderly society we have to give up just a little bit of our personal freedoms to those we ask to protect us. That is the only way it can work. And there is no conflict with the constitution there. No conflict with common sense either.

As far as the double standard for white and non-white armed suspects goes, is there real data backing up your claim? I feel very certain that if you pull a gun on a cop around here they will shoot you. Period. End of story. I feel like that is probably true anywhere.

We've seen some recent incidents where cops screwed up badly. In a couple of the incidents it was much worse than "screwing up".
I don't pretend for a minute that they deserve defending.

[scfire86]

I'm a white male and I've never felt oppressed.

Recent events involving armed white males and black males have shown a double standard in how force is used and applied.

There is a good reason why you have never felt oppressed.

The last thing on earth that you want to be right now is a white cop facing a deadly force decision involving a non-white suspect.

Especially if the non-white suspect is unarmed or has their arms raised.

[captnjak]

The last thing on earth that you want to be right now is a white cop facing a deadly force decision involving a non-white suspect.

[LaFireEducator]

Shame on any majority that lets themselves be oppressed.

I'm a white male and I've never felt oppressed.

I believe white males have been unfairly blamed for oppressing others. I believe we have been blamed for problems we didn't cause. I think there are people who will always demonize white males.

I think this country needs to be very careful about bending over backwards any more so than we've already done or we will face some of the problems Europe is facing. Some of those countries may never recover. At least not in any recognizable way.

Couldn't have said it any better myself.

While white males are not "oppressed", they are having more and more issues when it comes to remaining "equal" in the eyes of the law,.

[captnjak]

I'm sure LAFE labors under the belief that he is an oppressed white male.

Shame on any majority that lets themselves be oppressed.

I'm a white male and I've never felt oppressed.

I believe white males have been unfairly blamed for oppressing others. I believe we have been blamed for problems we didn't cause. I think there are people who will always demonize white males.

I think this country needs to be very careful about bending over backwards any more so than we've already done or we will face some of the problems Europe is facing. Some of those countries may never recover. At least not in any recognizable way.

[scfire86]

I'm sure LAFE labors under the belief that he is an oppressed white male.

[captnjak]

Too bad they are slow or unlikely to move when groups like "Black Lives matter" create havoc.

Guess that's just Obama's Justice department though.

I'm unaware of any "black lives matter" type group usurping federal land or interfering with federal warrants.

There would be no reason for the federal justice department (under Obama or anyone else) to get involved with local protests not involving federal jurisdiction.

Our mayor here in NYC did indeed let them run rampant and create real disturbances for a while. And you do have to wonder how he would have reacted to a "white lives matter" group. I suspect he would band them racists and threaten to lock them all up.

[scfire86]

Too bad they are slow or unlikely to move when groups like "Black Lives matter" create havoc.

Guess that's just Obama's Justice department though.

Which doesn't change the fact that Bundy and company are thieves getting what they deserve for confronting federal LEO's serving a lawful warrant.

I'm not surprised you tried to change the subject. Your hero is getting his *** kicked. Deservedly so.

[LaFireEducator]

Too bad they are slow or unlikely to move when groups like "Black Lives matter" create havoc.

Guess that's just Obama's Justice department though.

[scfire86]

The idiots that took on the Feds in Nevada are finally getting what's coming to them.

Four Idahoans among 14 newly indicted in 2014 Bundy Ranch standoff

The Feds may work slow, but they have a long memory.

Four men were arrested in Idaho Thursday after they were indicted on charges stemming from a 2014 armed standoff with federal officials rounding up cattle that belonged to rancher Cliven Bundy.

Couldn't happen to a nicer group.

[scfire86]

Just wondering what kind of excuses the liberals can conjure up to pardon or credit President Downgrade and the Democrats from any changes in fuel prices.

Lowest they've been in years. What excuse works for you, moonbat?

Don't see you blaming him for that.

[txgp17]

The Bush policies over the last seven years have led directly to the situation we're in now, along with a Republican controlled congress.

Just wondering what kind of excuses the liberals can conjure up to pardon or credit President Downgrade and the Democrats from any changes in fuel prices.

[MTKROUSH]

Congress is back in session after its August recess, and debating energy is top priority. House Democrats will propose an energy bill that will include an expansion of offshore drilling, the item that Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-OPEC) once regarded as a nonstarter to energy legislation. The bill will also include a “use it or lose it” provision to encourage oil companies to use the drilling leases they already have or return them to the public. Other provisions call for government oil-lease royalties to be invested in alternative energy technology and for tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. However, lest readers think Democrats are caving, the bill would retain the ban on offshore drilling within 50 miles of the coast if a state enacts such legislation or 100 miles if not, effectively keeping 18 billion barrels of oil and natural gas off limits. The bill would also rescind tax breaks for “Big Oil” and require oil companies to pay additional royalties for the privilege of drilling. That money would then be redistributed for renewable energy development.

A bill has been introduced in the House to repeal the District of Columbia’s ability to write its own gun laws, in deference to the recent Supreme Court ruling that found the District’s gun laws unconstitutional. According to The Washington Post, the bill would “repeal the D.C. ban on semiautomatic pistols and rifles; eliminate the city’s gun registration requirements; allow D.C. residents to purchase firearms in Virginia and Maryland; and abolish the regulation that guns at home be unloaded and safeguarded.” The Democrat leadership hoped to avoid handing the Republicans such a resounding legislative victory this close to the election, but at least 48 Demos support the new law because they represent districts that favor Second Amendment rights.

The Democrats have decided to abandon another vote on expanding the Children’s Health Insurance Program before the congressional recess. President Bush twice vetoed the bill because it would have added families to the tax-funded program who were quite capable of funding their own children’s health insurance. Democrats realized that they still do not have enough votes to override a veto, and there is not enough time to muster a fight this close to the recess. They plan to expand the program next year with what they expect to be an enlarged majority.
----------------
From my email box.

And they plan to get all this through before their next vacation. Gotta love our Congress. Finally off the thumbs in time for a vacation and then the election