Sherriff just shot in the head, crickets.....

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a reply to: Bloodworth

this is making headlines everywhere.

this needs to stop. the police need to regain control. angry mob mentality is detrimental.

this has nothing to do with racism.

it's mentalists going around killing cops that are helping trivializing actual wrong doings by the police by doing what we want the police to stop doing.

Shooter acted alone. Murdered a homeless man as well. He's a nutjob, not part of a mob.

So if he acted alone, should we not dig into how he was influenced by the current anti-cop sentiment being pushed hard by the media and political figures? The same people pushing this snip seem very willing to blame anything they can on Trump's or Republican 'incitement'.
Part of the OPS point is that there is a clear double standard here when assessing people's motivations for criminal acts - at least that is the way I read it. Seems valid to me.
It would be much better if views were consistent.
Either politicians and the media carry some of the blame for inciting people to act or they don't. Picking and choosing where to lay blame is part of what is dividing people. Constant finger-pointing.

Sure, dig into anything you want.

The "anti-cop" sentiment exists for good reasons, and the "anti-protest" narrative is being pushed just as hard by the right-wing meida.

Trump threatened to declare an insurrection and send in the US Military. That's what's being referred to as incitement.

Part of the OP's point is that they didn't research the matter clearly enough before the knee-jerk reaction that this story was being covered up by the media. No reason to aggrandize that.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a reply to: Bloodworth

this is making headlines everywhere.

this needs to stop. the police need to regain control. angry mob mentality is detrimental.

this has nothing to do with racism.

it's mentalists going around killing cops that are helping trivializing actual wrong doings by the police by doing what we want the police to stop doing.

Shooter acted alone. Murdered a homeless man as well. He's a nutjob, not part of a mob.

So if he acted alone, should we not dig into how he was influenced by the current anti-cop sentiment being pushed hard by the media and political figures? The same people pushing this snip seem very willing to blame anything they can on Trump's or Republican 'incitement'.
Part of the OPS point is that there is a clear double standard here when assessing people's motivations for criminal acts - at least that is the way I read it. Seems valid to me.
It would be much better if views were consistent.
Either politicians and the media carry some of the blame for inciting people to act or they don't. Picking and choosing where to lay blame is part of what is dividing people. Constant finger-pointing.

Sure, dig into anything you want.

The "anti-cop" sentiment exists for good reasons, and the "anti-protest" narrative is being pushed just as hard by the right-wing meida.

Trump threatened to declare an insurrection and send in the US Military. That's what's being referred to as incitement.

Part of the OP's point is that they didn't research the matter clearly enough before the knee-jerk reaction that this story was being covered up by the media. No reason to aggrandize that.

See that's the issue.
Trump says he might bring in the military to restore order and it's 'incitement' to riot and kill people.
Never mind that the rioting and killing were happening before he said anything.
But somehow the guy who goes and shoots a cop in the head was just a lone nut who wasn't incited to do anything by politicians and the media demeaning the police.
Doesn't make sense.
The rioters, looters and killers say, at least, that they are responding to the George Floyd killing - a rather rare event that the media treated as something commonplace, but I do not see any reason for anti-cop sentiment at all.
What reasons are you talking about?

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Bloodworth

Says “haven’t heard anything on the news outlets” and then links to a news piece about it? C’mon man, try harder.

I’m on the opposite side of the country and read about it before checking ats.

Yeah, I was going to point out the irony ... but realized it wouldn't matter to the faithful.

A hundred citations in Google news from about the time this post was made.

PS: Shooter in custody, apparently killed a homeless man as well. Solo threat.

KCRA Channel 3 June 10 6:26 PM PDT

So you're saying it was random? Or this "solo threat" was targeting police? Which is it?

a reply to: UKTruth

Yeah, I'm sure in your world Trump just gently suggested that he might possibly attack Americans on American soil if things didn't happen according to his schedule.

The "rioting and the killing" is not an insurrection and does not rise to the level of deploying the US Military.

The guy who went and shot a cop has already been caught. System working as intended.

You want to attach that to the larger narrative for obvious reasons. Yes, there has been incitement of the protests into riot, it's not that hard if you know what you're doing. Herd psychology. So far, the instigators include White Nationalists and the cops themselves. I'm certain there are larger forces behind these actions.

If you don't understand why at this point Americans are enraged everytime the police execute another person in the street, or the systematic creation of a miliarized police state, then nothing I can tell you will help you understand.

a reply to: panoz77

Random? No. According to the report I linked, the guy has anti-cop sentiments.

However, he killed a homelss man as well. He's a killer. I know what the facts told me.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

Yeah, I'm sure in your world Trump just gently suggested that he might possibly attack Americans on American soil if things didn't happen according to his schedule.

The "rioting and the killing" is not an insurrection and does not rise to the level of deploying the US Military.

And therefore the US Military was not deployed. Trump was saying that IF the States could not get the riots under control, he would. See how that works?

originally posted by: panoz77

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

Yeah, I'm sure in your world Trump just gently suggested that he might possibly attack Americans on American soil if things didn't happen according to his schedule.

The "rioting and the killing" is not an insurrection and does not rise to the level of deploying the US Military.

And therefore the US Military was not deployed. Trump was saying that IF the States could not get the riots under control, he would. See how that works?

Trump blabbered on and was subsequently corrected. Thank goodness that the Joint Chiefs are actually willing to stand up to an obviously imparied Chief Executive, even though the Vice President and Cabinet nor the Congress is.

I would guess that they told him "Not going to happen, Mr. President."

a reply to: UKTruth

Trump is the most powerful man in the universe. He has magic powers!

In gryphon66’s world. Trump is RESPONSIBLE for the effects of his words. Ppl like gryphon imbue DJ Trump with mystical energies which they deny to the crowds of the violent Lumpenproletariat.

It’s called “responsibility.”

Refusing to accord minorities this responsibility shows their underlying racism—assigning power (responsibility) the the white male alpha they refuse to acknowledge in whole crowds of people who they claim to “be on their side.”

a reply to: spacedoubt

I think things will be different also, but I was speaking about ATS’ response specifically.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

Yeah, I'm sure in your world Trump just gently suggested that he might possibly attack Americans on American soil if things didn't happen according to his schedule.

The "rioting and the killing" is not an insurrection and does not rise to the level of deploying the US Military.

The guy who went and shot a cop has already been caught. System working as intended.

You want to attach that to the larger narrative for obvious reasons. Yes, there has been incitement of the protests into riot, it's not that hard if you know what you're doing. Herd psychology. So far, the instigators include White Nationalists and the cops themselves. I'm certain there are larger forces behind these actions.

If you don't understand why at this point Americans are enraged everytime the police execute another person in the street, or the systematic creation of a miliarized police state, then nothing I can tell you will help you understand.

No, in my world, Trump has made a hot mess of the entire situation, making it worse, not better.
I agree that the US military should not be deployed - there is a limit though to that.

I don't see white nationalists inciting the violence unless you consider Antifa, Democrat politicians, the media and BLM as white nationalists.
The cops are not inciting anything at all. As far as I can see they are treating open criminals with kid gloves. Way too much is being let slide right now.

I also don't buy the selective outrage. Cops are human beings - within their ranks you are going to get really awful people and you'll also get some cops who can't handle the risk of the job and go too far in protecting themselves. That doesn't build a narrative that can be applied to all cops. That's dumb. It would be as dumb as saying there should be anti-black sentiment because some really awful black people keep shooting up their cities every weekend.

If we take a bad year the cops will kill about 1,000 people.
That is a low number considering their job is law enforcement. It is actually part of their job to kill criminals if absolutely necessary.

What exactly are the people who hate cops looking for? Perfection or we're going to burn the country down????

There are what, about 1m cops in the USA?
There is no evidence of any general issue here.

What are you seeing that leads you to believe the police, in general, are out of control?

More will die if we don't get a handle on the control structure of our media.
Before the unboycottables do more damage.

He's lucky to be alive with a headshot. Still not in the clear with complications from infection etc...

a reply to: UKTruth

"ANTIFA" I still think it's hilarious that's the "Big Bad" for the pro-Trump media.

You're okay with the US becoming a police state. I'm not.

As to your last question, we can start with militarization of the forces, rise of corrupt police unions, ludicrous levels of disproportionate police violence, and the trend in the US to exercise the extra-Constituitional "police power" for the Public Good as was done during the recent Pandemic.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: panoz77

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

Yeah, I'm sure in your world Trump just gently suggested that he might possibly attack Americans on American soil if things didn't happen according to his schedule.

The "rioting and the killing" is not an insurrection and does not rise to the level of deploying the US Military.

And therefore the US Military was not deployed. Trump was saying that IF the States could not get the riots under control, he would. See how that works?

Trump blabbered on and was subsequently corrected. Thank goodness that the Joint Chiefs are actually willing to stand up to an obviously imparied Chief Executive, even though the Vice President and Cabinet nor the Congress is.

I would guess that they told him "Not going to happen, Mr. President."

There is scope for Trump to deploy the military if he so chooses.
It's not the Joint Chief's decision to make. If they refused then they would be in open rebellion against their Commander in Chief and would need to be removed.
The decision is Trump's alone. He can take advice, but it's his call.
Now, I am glad he is not doing it at this stage, but the real fault here lies with the states. They should have fully deployed the National Guard a quite some time go.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: panoz77

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

Yeah, I'm sure in your world Trump just gently suggested that he might possibly attack Americans on American soil if things didn't happen according to his schedule.

The "rioting and the killing" is not an insurrection and does not rise to the level of deploying the US Military.

And therefore the US Military was not deployed. Trump was saying that IF the States could not get the riots under control, he would. See how that works?

Trump blabbered on and was subsequently corrected. Thank goodness that the Joint Chiefs are actually willing to stand up to an obviously imparied Chief Executive, even though the Vice President and Cabinet nor the Congress is.

I would guess that they told him "Not going to happen, Mr. President."

There is scope for Trump to deploy the military if he so chooses.
It's not the Joint Chief's decision to make. If they refused then they would be in open rebellion against their Commander in Chief and would need to be removed.
The decision is Trump's alone. He can take advice, but it's his call.
Now, I am glad he is not doing it at this stage, but the real fault here lies with the states. They should have fully deployed the National Guard a quite some time go.

No, there isn't. There is no insurrection, and further, the Insurrection Act has clear legal precedent for its use over the last hundred years.

It is the Joint Chiefs' responsibillty to inform the President regarding the reality of military forces, as Imm sure they did, that it would be a massive PR disaster for him if he ignores all rationality and orders such madness.

You want to remove the reasonable folks reigning in the lunatic? Oh yeah, I forgot it's Trump; you've been on-brand for about as long as anyone here.

I will make a wager. If Trump does ANYTHING using the power of the Presidency to utilize military forces that is not requested by the GOVERNOR OF A STATE he will lose in November by an avalanche if he isn't actually removed in a real coup. Want to bet?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

"ANTIFA" I still think it's hilarious that's the "Big Bad" for the pro-Trump media.

You're okay with the US becoming a police state. I'm not.

As to your last question, we can start with militarization of the forces, rise of corrupt police unions, ludicrous levels of disproportionate police violence, and the trend in the US to exercise the extra-Constituitional "police power" for the Public Good as was done during the recent Pandemic.

They are the 'big bad' for the USA.
Just need to look at what they are doing on the streets right now.

On your latter paragraph:
What does the militarization of the police force mean to you? You've used the term a lot, but what are you talking about precisely?
Corrupt police unions? Why pick on the police, lol. Unions are some of the most corrupt organisations on earth. I am all for getting rid of unions.
There is no disproportionate level of police violence. It's the opposite. They are subject to far more violence than they dish out on a per capita basis. I am amazed they show so much constraint considering the amount of violent crime in the US.

I do however agree with you on the misuse of police power in the lockdown. They should have refused the orders of Mayors and Governors, but it must be quite hard for them to give up their jobs in doing so.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

"ANTIFA" I still think it's hilarious that's the "Big Bad" for the pro-Trump media.

You're okay with the US becoming a police state. I'm not.

As to your last question, we can start with militarization of the forces, rise of corrupt police unions, ludicrous levels of disproportionate police violence, and the trend in the US to exercise the extra-Constituitional "police power" for the Public Good as was done during the recent Pandemic.

They are the 'big bad' for the USA.
Just need to look at what they are doing on the streets right now.

On your latter paragraph:
What does the militarization of the police force mean to you? You've used the term a lot, but what are you talking about precisely?
Corrupt police unions? Why pick on the police, lol. Unions are some of the most corrupt organisations on earth. I am all for getting rid of unions.
There is no disproportionate level of police violence. It's the opposite. They are subject to far more violence than they dish out on a per capita basis. I am amazed they show so much constraint considering the amount of violent crime in the US.

I do however agree with you on the misuse of police power in the lockdown. They should have refused the orders of Mayors and Governors, but it must be quite hard for them to give up their jobs in doing so.

No, "ANTIFA" is a classic phantom menace created by Trump and his media machine.

I'm against all unjustified use of the extra-constitutioanl police power ... not just the one's that fit my narrative.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: panoz77

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

Yeah, I'm sure in your world Trump just gently suggested that he might possibly attack Americans on American soil if things didn't happen according to his schedule.

The "rioting and the killing" is not an insurrection and does not rise to the level of deploying the US Military.

And therefore the US Military was not deployed. Trump was saying that IF the States could not get the riots under control, he would. See how that works?

Trump blabbered on and was subsequently corrected. Thank goodness that the Joint Chiefs are actually willing to stand up to an obviously imparied Chief Executive, even though the Vice President and Cabinet nor the Congress is.

I would guess that they told him "Not going to happen, Mr. President."

There is scope for Trump to deploy the military if he so chooses.
It's not the Joint Chief's decision to make. If they refused then they would be in open rebellion against their Commander in Chief and would need to be removed.
The decision is Trump's alone. He can take advice, but it's his call.
Now, I am glad he is not doing it at this stage, but the real fault here lies with the states. They should have fully deployed the National Guard a quite some time go.

No, there isn't. There is no insurrection, and further, the Insurrection Act has legal precedent for it's use.

It is the Joint Chiefs responsibillty to inform the President, as I"m sure they did, that it would be a massive PR disaster for him if he ignores all rationality.

You want to remove the reasonable folks reigning in the lunatic? Oh yeah, I forgot Trump.

I will make a wager. If Trump does ANYTHING using the power of the Presidency that is not requested by the GOVERNOR OF A STATE he will lose in November by an avalanche. Want to bet?

You are not correct there.

Trump can invoke the Insurrection Act

After the passage of the 14th Amendment, another provision was added to the Insurrection Act that allows the president to use the military without the consent of a state government to suppress any “insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy.”

This is only if state law enforcement is unable to protect citizens and the criminal conduct “obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.”

This section was enacted to implement the 14th Amendment, which gave citizenship and other legal rights to African Americans, and does not require a request from or even the permission of the governor of the affected state.

It's a tough sell to suggest that there is no current domestic violence that the states are unable (or unwilling to handle).
His threat of using the military seems to be perfectly in line with his authority.

Yes, the Joint Chiefs can advise, but they can not refuse an order and keep their jobs.
I am glad they are advising him to not deploy the military, I am just pointing out that they have zero power to stop it beyond a military coup.

Trump has already lost in November. Political outcomes are not the argument.
He does not require any State permission to invoke the Insurrection Act and deploy the military - that is a fact and entirely Constitutional.

This is NOT the Mud Pit!!!

All rules for polite political debate will be enforced.
Member must Stay on Topic!!!
Reaffirming Our Desire For Productive Political Debate (REVISED)
Please read:.
No Political Trolling.....either in words or images.
Is There Civilization Without Civility

You are responsible for your own posts.....those who ignore that responsibility will face mod actions.


and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

"ANTIFA" I still think it's hilarious that's the "Big Bad" for the pro-Trump media.

You're okay with the US becoming a police state. I'm not.

As to your last question, we can start with militarization of the forces, rise of corrupt police unions, ludicrous levels of disproportionate police violence, and the trend in the US to exercise the extra-Constituitional "police power" for the Public Good as was done during the recent Pandemic.

They are the 'big bad' for the USA.
Just need to look at what they are doing on the streets right now.

On your latter paragraph:
What does the militarization of the police force mean to you? You've used the term a lot, but what are you talking about precisely?
Corrupt police unions? Why pick on the police, lol. Unions are some of the most corrupt organisations on earth. I am all for getting rid of unions.
There is no disproportionate level of police violence. It's the opposite. They are subject to far more violence than they dish out on a per capita basis. I am amazed they show so much constraint considering the amount of violent crime in the US.

I do however agree with you on the misuse of police power in the lockdown. They should have refused the orders of Mayors and Governors, but it must be quite hard for them to give up their jobs in doing so.

No, "ANTIFA" is a classic phantom menace created by Trump and his media machine.

I'm against all unjustified use of the extra-constitutioanl police power ... not just the one's that fit my narrative.

If your argument is that Antifa doesn't exist, then there is no mileage in debating their actions with you.
They have existed for nearly 100 years and their members are extremely vocal - and violent - right now.