Seattle?

A place to share your views and make your case on any issues fit to discuss.

Moderators: kmax, SonomaCat, rtb

Post Reply
iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5227
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: Seattle?

Post by iaafan » Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:04 pm

91catAlum wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 11:14 am
iaafan wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 10:09 am
catatac wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 8:27 am
iaafan wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 8:20 am
91catAlum wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 6:47 am
wbtfg wrote:
Wed Jun 17, 2020 9:40 pm
Rich K wrote:
Sat Jun 13, 2020 8:22 pm
wbtfg wrote:
Sat Jun 13, 2020 8:17 pm
Rich K wrote:
Sat Jun 13, 2020 8:15 pm
wbtfg wrote:
Sat Jun 13, 2020 8:14 pm


Is that where the unarmed black man was just shot by police after being arrested for sleeping in his car?
Are you justifying this ******?
Asked a simple question. That’s all
No, you are attempting to justify this mayhem.
The moron was not shot because he was sleeping in his car, he was shot because he was resisting arrest. You left that part out.
From what I hear it was PROBABLY a justified use of force.
But there is no justification for this BS, not in a civil society.
The Atlanta police officer was formally charged with felony murder.
That's just to appease the mob at this point. It will get reduced. The suspect resisted arrest, wrestled the cop to the ground, stole his taser, ran away, then as the cop is in foot pursuit and NOT shooting at the suspect, the suspect turns around and fires the taser at the cop. At that point the cop uses deadly force.

You can make the argument that the cop didn't need to shoot to kill, that's certainly arguable. The other side of that is, what if the suspect incapacitated the cop with the taser and took his gun? It's easy to see that the cop believed his life was absolutely on the line in that moment.

If we get to the point where cops aren't allowed to defend themselves against criminals willing to kill them, who would ever choose to become a cop? We'll see massive numbers of cops quitting their jobs, we won't be able to field an effective police force, which leads us further toward anarchy.
I think you're right. It'll get reduced. Thought I saw where the mayor or police chief said that a taser is a deadly weapon a week before this happened. Something like that. If so, it's kind of hard to charge him with murder or much of anything.

I also agree that I don't think the cop's life was in danger from a taser. I can't figure out how two cops can't subdue one drunk person, but that's a discussion for another day.

Another discussion is what should cops do in this situation where someone is violently resisting arrest? If you have enough information on the person (driver's license, car plates) could you just let them run away, then contact them and ask them to turn themselves in or they will be charged with more crimes? Obviously the person could just become a fugitive or they could arm themselves when you go in to apprehend, and more people would just resist and run in hopes of getting away. I just don't understand why the guy ran away when he knew the cops had him ID'd and had his car. I think he was out of jail due to Covid and obviously didn't want to go back, but what was he going to do if he got away?

If I'm a cop I'm tempted to just let the person go and tell them as their going that they're going to be found and be in even more trouble then. I think most people that flee would turn themselves in peacefully, but what do I know?
If someone is "Violently resisting arrest", you think it's a good idea to let them go on their way, obviously in a crazy state of mind (normal people in their right state of mind just flat out don't resist arrest)? We all know some of these instances would result in a killing spree by the crazed individual.
Well maybe, but I don't know of that ever happening before. I've never heard of someone getting away from police and then going on a killing spree. If that's true that people fleeing cops go on killing sprees, it would be a bad idea to just let them go.
Maybe not a killing spree but it definitely creates additional liability for the police. Say they're on a domestic violence call, the husband resists arrest and they let him go, then later that night he kills his wife. I imagine her family would partially fault the cops in that situation.
Dang, you ruined my plan!

Yes, that's always a possibility. Maybe they could create a law to remove the liability for something like that and keep a policeman at the residence until the man was apprehended.



91catAlum
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7074
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 4:41 pm
Location: Clancy, MT

Re: Seattle?

Post by 91catAlum » Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:45 pm

wbtfg wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:03 pm
91catAlum wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 11:14 am
iaafan wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 10:09 am
catatac wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 8:27 am
iaafan wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 8:20 am
91catAlum wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 6:47 am
wbtfg wrote:
Wed Jun 17, 2020 9:40 pm
Rich K wrote:
Sat Jun 13, 2020 8:22 pm
wbtfg wrote:
Sat Jun 13, 2020 8:17 pm
Rich K wrote:
Sat Jun 13, 2020 8:15 pm


Are you justifying this ******?
Asked a simple question. That’s all
No, you are attempting to justify this mayhem.
The moron was not shot because he was sleeping in his car, he was shot because he was resisting arrest. You left that part out.
From what I hear it was PROBABLY a justified use of force.
But there is no justification for this BS, not in a civil society.
The Atlanta police officer was formally charged with felony murder.
That's just to appease the mob at this point. It will get reduced. The suspect resisted arrest, wrestled the cop to the ground, stole his taser, ran away, then as the cop is in foot pursuit and NOT shooting at the suspect, the suspect turns around and fires the taser at the cop. At that point the cop uses deadly force.

You can make the argument that the cop didn't need to shoot to kill, that's certainly arguable. The other side of that is, what if the suspect incapacitated the cop with the taser and took his gun? It's easy to see that the cop believed his life was absolutely on the line in that moment.

If we get to the point where cops aren't allowed to defend themselves against criminals willing to kill them, who would ever choose to become a cop? We'll see massive numbers of cops quitting their jobs, we won't be able to field an effective police force, which leads us further toward anarchy.
I think you're right. It'll get reduced. Thought I saw where the mayor or police chief said that a taser is a deadly weapon a week before this happened. Something like that. If so, it's kind of hard to charge him with murder or much of anything.

I also agree that I don't think the cop's life was in danger from a taser. I can't figure out how two cops can't subdue one drunk person, but that's a discussion for another day.

Another discussion is what should cops do in this situation where someone is violently resisting arrest? If you have enough information on the person (driver's license, car plates) could you just let them run away, then contact them and ask them to turn themselves in or they will be charged with more crimes? Obviously the person could just become a fugitive or they could arm themselves when you go in to apprehend, and more people would just resist and run in hopes of getting away. I just don't understand why the guy ran away when he knew the cops had him ID'd and had his car. I think he was out of jail due to Covid and obviously didn't want to go back, but what was he going to do if he got away?

If I'm a cop I'm tempted to just let the person go and tell them as their going that they're going to be found and be in even more trouble then. I think most people that flee would turn themselves in peacefully, but what do I know?
If someone is "Violently resisting arrest", you think it's a good idea to let them go on their way, obviously in a crazy state of mind (normal people in their right state of mind just flat out don't resist arrest)? We all know some of these instances would result in a killing spree by the crazed individual.
Well maybe, but I don't know of that ever happening before. I've never heard of someone getting away from police and then going on a killing spree. If that's true that people fleeing cops go on killing sprees, it would be a bad idea to just let them go.
Maybe not a killing spree but it definitely creates additional liability for the police. Say they're on a domestic violence call, the husband resists arrest and they let him go, then later that night he kills his wife. I imagine her family would partially fault the cops in that situation.
A call about a guy sleeping in his car is different from a domestic disturbance call. I would assume all/most police officers understand that.
A week ago the police are bad at their jobs, and today all/most understand the proper response to every call... got it.

I was responding to the general suggestion that cops let people go if they resist, not the Atlanta situation specifically. Any way you slice it, that creates additional liability for the police.
A DUI suspect jumps out of his car, punches a cop, and runs away. They let him go, later that night he causes a car accident.
A guy tripping on drugs causing a disturbance resists arrest and runs away. Later that night he dies of an overdose.
etc
etc
etc.


Image
24-17
31-23
29-25
48-14

91catAlum
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7074
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 4:41 pm
Location: Clancy, MT

Re: Seattle?

Post by 91catAlum » Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:46 pm

iaafan wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:04 pm
91catAlum wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 11:14 am
iaafan wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 10:09 am
catatac wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 8:27 am
iaafan wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 8:20 am
91catAlum wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 6:47 am
wbtfg wrote:
Wed Jun 17, 2020 9:40 pm
Rich K wrote:
Sat Jun 13, 2020 8:22 pm
wbtfg wrote:
Sat Jun 13, 2020 8:17 pm
Rich K wrote:
Sat Jun 13, 2020 8:15 pm


Are you justifying this ******?
Asked a simple question. That’s all
No, you are attempting to justify this mayhem.
The moron was not shot because he was sleeping in his car, he was shot because he was resisting arrest. You left that part out.
From what I hear it was PROBABLY a justified use of force.
But there is no justification for this BS, not in a civil society.
The Atlanta police officer was formally charged with felony murder.
That's just to appease the mob at this point. It will get reduced. The suspect resisted arrest, wrestled the cop to the ground, stole his taser, ran away, then as the cop is in foot pursuit and NOT shooting at the suspect, the suspect turns around and fires the taser at the cop. At that point the cop uses deadly force.

You can make the argument that the cop didn't need to shoot to kill, that's certainly arguable. The other side of that is, what if the suspect incapacitated the cop with the taser and took his gun? It's easy to see that the cop believed his life was absolutely on the line in that moment.

If we get to the point where cops aren't allowed to defend themselves against criminals willing to kill them, who would ever choose to become a cop? We'll see massive numbers of cops quitting their jobs, we won't be able to field an effective police force, which leads us further toward anarchy.
I think you're right. It'll get reduced. Thought I saw where the mayor or police chief said that a taser is a deadly weapon a week before this happened. Something like that. If so, it's kind of hard to charge him with murder or much of anything.

I also agree that I don't think the cop's life was in danger from a taser. I can't figure out how two cops can't subdue one drunk person, but that's a discussion for another day.

Another discussion is what should cops do in this situation where someone is violently resisting arrest? If you have enough information on the person (driver's license, car plates) could you just let them run away, then contact them and ask them to turn themselves in or they will be charged with more crimes? Obviously the person could just become a fugitive or they could arm themselves when you go in to apprehend, and more people would just resist and run in hopes of getting away. I just don't understand why the guy ran away when he knew the cops had him ID'd and had his car. I think he was out of jail due to Covid and obviously didn't want to go back, but what was he going to do if he got away?

If I'm a cop I'm tempted to just let the person go and tell them as their going that they're going to be found and be in even more trouble then. I think most people that flee would turn themselves in peacefully, but what do I know?
If someone is "Violently resisting arrest", you think it's a good idea to let them go on their way, obviously in a crazy state of mind (normal people in their right state of mind just flat out don't resist arrest)? We all know some of these instances would result in a killing spree by the crazed individual.
Well maybe, but I don't know of that ever happening before. I've never heard of someone getting away from police and then going on a killing spree. If that's true that people fleeing cops go on killing sprees, it would be a bad idea to just let them go.
Maybe not a killing spree but it definitely creates additional liability for the police. Say they're on a domestic violence call, the husband resists arrest and they let him go, then later that night he kills his wife. I imagine her family would partially fault the cops in that situation.
Dang, you ruined my plan!

Yes, that's always a possibility. Maybe they could create a law to remove the liability for something like that and keep a policeman at the residence until the man was apprehended.
Ya, you could figure out solutions like that, that would probably work. It would be a long list of procedures for every different type of call, though. More training I suppose.


Image
24-17
31-23
29-25
48-14

ilovethecats
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 4494
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: Seattle?

Post by ilovethecats » Thu Jun 18, 2020 1:41 pm

91catAlum wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:45 pm
wbtfg wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:03 pm
91catAlum wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 11:14 am
iaafan wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 10:09 am
catatac wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 8:27 am
iaafan wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 8:20 am
91catAlum wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 6:47 am
wbtfg wrote:
Wed Jun 17, 2020 9:40 pm
Rich K wrote:
Sat Jun 13, 2020 8:22 pm
wbtfg wrote:
Sat Jun 13, 2020 8:17 pm


Asked a simple question. That’s all
No, you are attempting to justify this mayhem.
The moron was not shot because he was sleeping in his car, he was shot because he was resisting arrest. You left that part out.
From what I hear it was PROBABLY a justified use of force.
But there is no justification for this BS, not in a civil society.
The Atlanta police officer was formally charged with felony murder.
That's just to appease the mob at this point. It will get reduced. The suspect resisted arrest, wrestled the cop to the ground, stole his taser, ran away, then as the cop is in foot pursuit and NOT shooting at the suspect, the suspect turns around and fires the taser at the cop. At that point the cop uses deadly force.

You can make the argument that the cop didn't need to shoot to kill, that's certainly arguable. The other side of that is, what if the suspect incapacitated the cop with the taser and took his gun? It's easy to see that the cop believed his life was absolutely on the line in that moment.

If we get to the point where cops aren't allowed to defend themselves against criminals willing to kill them, who would ever choose to become a cop? We'll see massive numbers of cops quitting their jobs, we won't be able to field an effective police force, which leads us further toward anarchy.
I think you're right. It'll get reduced. Thought I saw where the mayor or police chief said that a taser is a deadly weapon a week before this happened. Something like that. If so, it's kind of hard to charge him with murder or much of anything.

I also agree that I don't think the cop's life was in danger from a taser. I can't figure out how two cops can't subdue one drunk person, but that's a discussion for another day.

Another discussion is what should cops do in this situation where someone is violently resisting arrest? If you have enough information on the person (driver's license, car plates) could you just let them run away, then contact them and ask them to turn themselves in or they will be charged with more crimes? Obviously the person could just become a fugitive or they could arm themselves when you go in to apprehend, and more people would just resist and run in hopes of getting away. I just don't understand why the guy ran away when he knew the cops had him ID'd and had his car. I think he was out of jail due to Covid and obviously didn't want to go back, but what was he going to do if he got away?

If I'm a cop I'm tempted to just let the person go and tell them as their going that they're going to be found and be in even more trouble then. I think most people that flee would turn themselves in peacefully, but what do I know?
If someone is "Violently resisting arrest", you think it's a good idea to let them go on their way, obviously in a crazy state of mind (normal people in their right state of mind just flat out don't resist arrest)? We all know some of these instances would result in a killing spree by the crazed individual.
Well maybe, but I don't know of that ever happening before. I've never heard of someone getting away from police and then going on a killing spree. If that's true that people fleeing cops go on killing sprees, it would be a bad idea to just let them go.
Maybe not a killing spree but it definitely creates additional liability for the police. Say they're on a domestic violence call, the husband resists arrest and they let him go, then later that night he kills his wife. I imagine her family would partially fault the cops in that situation.
A call about a guy sleeping in his car is different from a domestic disturbance call. I would assume all/most police officers understand that.
A week ago the police are bad at their jobs, and today all/most understand the proper response to every call... got it.

I was responding to the general suggestion that cops let people go if they resist, not the Atlanta situation specifically. Any way you slice it, that creates additional liability for the police.
A DUI suspect jumps out of his car, punches a cop, and runs away. They let him go, later that night he causes a car accident.
A guy tripping on drugs causing a disturbance resists arrest and runs away. Later that night he dies of an overdose.
etc
etc
etc.
Just to play devils advocate, it should be noted that many times cops do just that, let a fugitive go if they think chasing him on foot or vehicle because dangerous for them or citizens. Especially when they already had critical information and could likely make an arrest.

I understand it's a slippery slope. I don't even blame police for being mad. But I do feel that deadly force is used far too often. I understand that's easy for me to say behind my keyboard and not out on the streets! :wink:



iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5227
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: Seattle?

Post by iaafan » Thu Jun 18, 2020 1:51 pm

91catAlum wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:46 pm
iaafan wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 12:04 pm
91catAlum wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 11:14 am
iaafan wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 10:09 am
catatac wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 8:27 am
iaafan wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 8:20 am
91catAlum wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 6:47 am
wbtfg wrote:
Wed Jun 17, 2020 9:40 pm
Rich K wrote:
Sat Jun 13, 2020 8:22 pm
wbtfg wrote:
Sat Jun 13, 2020 8:17 pm


Asked a simple question. That’s all
No, you are attempting to justify this mayhem.
The moron was not shot because he was sleeping in his car, he was shot because he was resisting arrest. You left that part out.
From what I hear it was PROBABLY a justified use of force.
But there is no justification for this BS, not in a civil society.
The Atlanta police officer was formally charged with felony murder.
That's just to appease the mob at this point. It will get reduced. The suspect resisted arrest, wrestled the cop to the ground, stole his taser, ran away, then as the cop is in foot pursuit and NOT shooting at the suspect, the suspect turns around and fires the taser at the cop. At that point the cop uses deadly force.

You can make the argument that the cop didn't need to shoot to kill, that's certainly arguable. The other side of that is, what if the suspect incapacitated the cop with the taser and took his gun? It's easy to see that the cop believed his life was absolutely on the line in that moment.

If we get to the point where cops aren't allowed to defend themselves against criminals willing to kill them, who would ever choose to become a cop? We'll see massive numbers of cops quitting their jobs, we won't be able to field an effective police force, which leads us further toward anarchy.
I think you're right. It'll get reduced. Thought I saw where the mayor or police chief said that a taser is a deadly weapon a week before this happened. Something like that. If so, it's kind of hard to charge him with murder or much of anything.

I also agree that I don't think the cop's life was in danger from a taser. I can't figure out how two cops can't subdue one drunk person, but that's a discussion for another day.

Another discussion is what should cops do in this situation where someone is violently resisting arrest? If you have enough information on the person (driver's license, car plates) could you just let them run away, then contact them and ask them to turn themselves in or they will be charged with more crimes? Obviously the person could just become a fugitive or they could arm themselves when you go in to apprehend, and more people would just resist and run in hopes of getting away. I just don't understand why the guy ran away when he knew the cops had him ID'd and had his car. I think he was out of jail due to Covid and obviously didn't want to go back, but what was he going to do if he got away?

If I'm a cop I'm tempted to just let the person go and tell them as their going that they're going to be found and be in even more trouble then. I think most people that flee would turn themselves in peacefully, but what do I know?
If someone is "Violently resisting arrest", you think it's a good idea to let them go on their way, obviously in a crazy state of mind (normal people in their right state of mind just flat out don't resist arrest)? We all know some of these instances would result in a killing spree by the crazed individual.
Well maybe, but I don't know of that ever happening before. I've never heard of someone getting away from police and then going on a killing spree. If that's true that people fleeing cops go on killing sprees, it would be a bad idea to just let them go.
Maybe not a killing spree but it definitely creates additional liability for the police. Say they're on a domestic violence call, the husband resists arrest and they let him go, then later that night he kills his wife. I imagine her family would partially fault the cops in that situation.
Dang, you ruined my plan!

Yes, that's always a possibility. Maybe they could create a law to remove the liability for something like that and keep a policeman at the residence until the man was apprehended.
Ya, you could figure out solutions like that, that would probably work. It would be a long list of procedures for every different type of call, though. More training I suppose.
Could continue pursuing, but not shoot unless person gets in a car? Could pursue and shoot in the leg?



User avatar
BigBruceBaker
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3407
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:24 pm
Location: Sidney

Re: Seattle?

Post by BigBruceBaker » Thu Jun 18, 2020 2:52 pm

I'm not advocating for more police shootings, but they are intentionally trained to shoot for center mass. Not to kill more people, its just the largest target to neutralize the threat quickest. Aiming for smaller areas (such as a leg) has an even lesser chance of a hit. The amount of bullets that actually hit their intended target is about 1% (that's said a bit sarcastically) but honestly it rarely happens where you shoot once and hit, even with huge training the adrenaline takes over.

Again I am not in any way suggesting we start shooting more people, just explaining how its trained and why you can't practically aim for a smaller, non lethal area.


I love the Bobcats and the Miami Hurricanes an unhealthy level

iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5227
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: Seattle?

Post by iaafan » Thu Jun 18, 2020 3:32 pm

BigBruceBaker wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 2:52 pm
I'm not advocating for more police shootings, but they are intentionally trained to shoot for center mass. Not to kill more people, its just the largest target to neutralize the threat quickest. Aiming for smaller areas (such as a leg) has an even lesser chance of a hit. The amount of bullets that actually hit their intended target is about 1% (that's said a bit sarcastically) but honestly it rarely happens where you shoot once and hit, even with huge training the adrenaline takes over.

Again I am not in any way suggesting we start shooting more people, just explaining how its trained and why you can't practically aim for a smaller, non lethal area.
Yeah, I guess i watch too many Dirty Harry movies.



User avatar
BigBruceBaker
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3407
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 1:24 pm
Location: Sidney

Re: Seattle?

Post by BigBruceBaker » Thu Jun 18, 2020 3:43 pm

iaafan wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 3:32 pm
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 2:52 pm
I'm not advocating for more police shootings, but they are intentionally trained to shoot for center mass. Not to kill more people, its just the largest target to neutralize the threat quickest. Aiming for smaller areas (such as a leg) has an even lesser chance of a hit. The amount of bullets that actually hit their intended target is about 1% (that's said a bit sarcastically) but honestly it rarely happens where you shoot once and hit, even with huge training the adrenaline takes over.

Again I am not in any way suggesting we start shooting more people, just explaining how its trained and why you can't practically aim for a smaller, non lethal area.
Yeah, I guess i watch too many Dirty Harry movies.
"you gotta ask yourself, do you feel lucky". Lol I love that era of movie.


I love the Bobcats and the Miami Hurricanes an unhealthy level

User avatar
RickRund
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 4384
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:08 pm
Location: Post Falls ID

Re: Seattle?

Post by RickRund » Thu Jun 18, 2020 5:50 pm

BigBruceBaker wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 3:43 pm
iaafan wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 3:32 pm
BigBruceBaker wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 2:52 pm
I'm not advocating for more police shootings, but they are intentionally trained to shoot for center mass. Not to kill more people, its just the largest target to neutralize the threat quickest. Aiming for smaller areas (such as a leg) has an even lesser chance of a hit. The amount of bullets that actually hit their intended target is about 1% (that's said a bit sarcastically) but honestly it rarely happens where you shoot once and hit, even with huge training the adrenaline takes over.

Again I am not in any way suggesting we start shooting more people, just explaining how its trained and why you can't practically aim for a smaller, non lethal area.
Yeah, I guess i watch too many Dirty Harry movies.
"you gotta ask yourself, do you feel lucky". Lol I love that era of movie.
When I read the first post was going to say you watch too many movies :lol:

Too great of a chance of missing that 6-8 inch target in the excitement and hitting an unintended body... Unless of course you are Dirty Harry.



User avatar
RickRund
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 4384
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2010 6:08 pm
Location: Post Falls ID

Re: Seattle?

Post by RickRund » Thu Jun 18, 2020 6:15 pm

Here is a video from the chaz/chop area... Do you agree?

https://freedomnewsusa.com/video-chaz-r ... ck-demand/



User avatar
The Butcher
1st Team All-BobcatNation
Posts: 1901
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 8:51 am

Re: Seattle?

Post by The Butcher » Fri Jun 19, 2020 7:44 am

Ummmm, this could incite some violence in Tulsa tomorrow.




Rich K
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3580
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 5:40 pm
Location: Cody WY

Re: Seattle?

Post by Rich K » Fri Jun 19, 2020 8:16 am

The Butcher wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 7:44 am
Ummmm, this could incite some violence in Tulsa tomorrow.

No impulse control within the democrat base.


Image

iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5227
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: Seattle?

Post by iaafan » Fri Jun 19, 2020 8:54 am

Rich K wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 8:16 am
The Butcher wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 7:44 am
Ummmm, this could incite some violence in Tulsa tomorrow.

No impulse control within the democrat base.
:lol: :lol: :bs: :crazy: To be clear, Trump just threatened protesters (and implied physical violence) for exercising their first amendment right and your comment is "No impulse control within the democrat base." Wow!



User avatar
technoCat
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3229
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 5:06 pm
Location: Bozeman

Re: Seattle?

Post by technoCat » Fri Jun 19, 2020 8:59 am

iaafan wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 8:54 am
Rich K wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 8:16 am
The Butcher wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 7:44 am
Ummmm, this could incite some violence in Tulsa tomorrow.

No impulse control within the democrat base.
:lol: :lol: :bs: :crazy: To be clear, Trump just threatened protesters (and implied physical violence) for exercising their first amendment right and your comment is "No impulse control within the democrat base." Wow!
I took it that protesters won't get away with assaulting cops and calling it "peaceful". :wink:

Oklahomans love their freedom, if the protesters don't get up in their faces they will be fine.


DIE HARD CATS FAN SINCE 01/05/1984

iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5227
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: Seattle?

Post by iaafan » Fri Jun 19, 2020 9:10 am

technoCat wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 8:59 am
iaafan wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 8:54 am
Rich K wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 8:16 am
The Butcher wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 7:44 am
Ummmm, this could incite some violence in Tulsa tomorrow.

No impulse control within the democrat base.
:lol: :lol: :bs: :crazy: To be clear, Trump just threatened protesters (and implied physical violence) for exercising their first amendment right and your comment is "No impulse control within the democrat base." Wow!
I took it that protesters won't get away with assaulting cops and calling it "peaceful". :wink:

Oklahomans love their freedom, if the protesters don't get up in their faces they will be fine.
Most (all?) of the violence that has occurred at Trump rallies has been from Trump telling his ralliers to beat people that are protesting and then some of them following through on it. So kind of difficult to think that's not what he's doing here. I guess we'll see. The real purpose of his post is to deflect from the obvious exposure to Covid that he's creating to get some cheers. So, I guess he got me there. I fell for it. :(



User avatar
technoCat
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3229
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 5:06 pm
Location: Bozeman

Re: Seattle?

Post by technoCat » Fri Jun 19, 2020 9:15 am

iaafan wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 9:10 am
technoCat wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 8:59 am
iaafan wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 8:54 am
Rich K wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 8:16 am
The Butcher wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 7:44 am
Ummmm, this could incite some violence in Tulsa tomorrow.

No impulse control within the democrat base.
:lol: :lol: :bs: :crazy: To be clear, Trump just threatened protesters (and implied physical violence) for exercising their first amendment right and your comment is "No impulse control within the democrat base." Wow!
I took it that protesters won't get away with assaulting cops and calling it "peaceful". :wink:

Oklahomans love their freedom, if the protesters don't get up in their faces they will be fine.
Most (all?) of the violence that has occurred at Trump rallies has been from Trump telling his ralliers to beat people that are protesting and then some of them following through on it. So kind of difficult to think that's not what he's doing here. I guess we'll see. The real purpose of his post is to deflect from the obvious exposure to Covid that he's creating to get some cheers. So, I guess he got me there. I fell for it. :(
There you go making sweeping statements about Trump supporters again. Do you have a lick of proof of this? Were you at least at a rally that went bad?


DIE HARD CATS FAN SINCE 01/05/1984

iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5227
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: Seattle?

Post by iaafan » Fri Jun 19, 2020 10:16 am

technoCat wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 9:15 am
iaafan wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 9:10 am
technoCat wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 8:59 am
iaafan wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 8:54 am
Rich K wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 8:16 am
The Butcher wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 7:44 am
Ummmm, this could incite some violence in Tulsa tomorrow.

No impulse control within the democrat base.
:lol: :lol: :bs: :crazy: To be clear, Trump just threatened protesters (and implied physical violence) for exercising their first amendment right and your comment is "No impulse control within the democrat base." Wow!
I took it that protesters won't get away with assaulting cops and calling it "peaceful". :wink:

Oklahomans love their freedom, if the protesters don't get up in their faces they will be fine.
Most (all?) of the violence that has occurred at Trump rallies has been from Trump telling his ralliers to beat people that are protesting and then some of them following through on it. So kind of difficult to think that's not what he's doing here. I guess we'll see. The real purpose of his post is to deflect from the obvious exposure to Covid that he's creating to get some cheers. So, I guess he got me there. I fell for it. :(
There you go making sweeping statements about Trump supporters again. Do you have a lick of proof of this? Were you at least at a rally that went bad?
"You, you, you"

It was fairly well publicized, surprised anyone missed it.



iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5227
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: Seattle?

Post by iaafan » Fri Jun 19, 2020 10:19 am




Rich K
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3580
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 5:40 pm
Location: Cody WY

Re: Seattle?

Post by Rich K » Fri Jun 19, 2020 10:26 am

Behave because you will face law enforcement that won't treat you with kid gloves.

TRIGGERED!


Image

iaafan
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 5227
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 12:44 pm

Re: Seattle?

Post by iaafan » Fri Jun 19, 2020 11:06 am

Rich K wrote:
Fri Jun 19, 2020 10:26 am
Behave because you will face law enforcement that won't treat you with kid gloves.

TRIGGERED!
Yes if the Trump instigators start trouble, they will be dealt with by the Tulsa police. \:D/ That will allow for peaceful protesting.



Post Reply