RE: Breaking News in Dallas

RE: Breaking News in Dallas (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

BamaD -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/11/2016 10:50:38 PM)
FR did you see NBC coverage of the St Paul demonstration. Buried in the middle of the story was the fact that 21 officers were injured. People were throwing water, liquids, rocks, and a "building material called rebar" and oh yes a molitov cocktail at the police. I assume everyone knows what rebar is and that when droped from an overpass like this was it can be leathal. Btw it was a peaceful demonstration except that the cops arrested a bunch of people.

jlf1961 -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/12/2016 12:21:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD FR did you see NBC coverage of the St Paul demonstration. Buried in the middle of the story was the fact that 21 officers were injured. People were throwing water, liquids, rocks, and a "building material called rebar" and oh yes a molitov cocktail at the police. I assume everyone knows what rebar is and that when droped from an overpass like this was it can be leathal. Btw it was a peaceful demonstration except that the cops arrested a bunch of people. It is acceptable behavior for BLM supporters to do this, they are defending African Americans. You know, I would think that Martin Luther King jr is spinning in his grave right now, considering that some of his most profound statements are being quoted by the same people who do nothing to disavow the violence the movement is spawning. I called a old army buddy of mine today, just to catch up, and asked him what he thought of this, he said that these people were setting back civil rights by decades. He also said that he was glad his father did not live to see this. His father marched with MLK in Birmingham. I felt that Zimmerman should have at least gotten convicted of manslaughter, I believe that the officers who beat Rodney King got off too easy. But it is really hard to support a movement that distorts facts, even when it was determined, as in Minnesota the cop was NOT white, they are still saying he was.

Greta75 -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/12/2016 3:37:14 AM)
FR It is sad that there are up to 30 protesters wearing camo gear, bulletproof vests and gas masks, with AR15 Rifles slung on their shoulders. And YET, none of them helped the police shoot the shooter! WTF! http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-dallas-chief-20160711-snap-story.html

BamaD -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/12/2016 4:08:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 FR It is sad that there are up to 30 protesters wearing camo gear, bulletproof vests and gas masks, with AR15 Rifles slung on their shoulders. And YET, none of them helped the police shoot the shooter! WTF! http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-dallas-chief-20160711-snap-story.html The one carring the AR who the police talked too didn't have ammo. The first responsiblity of the gun owners was to stay out of the way of the cops and not create more confusion, which is just what they did. And where did you find this 30 number. The momment the Sooting started they knew the police would immeadiatly have considered them a threat.

thompsonx -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/12/2016 4:20:23 AM)
ORIGINAL: Greta75 FR It is sad that there are up to 30 protesters wearing camo gear, bulletproof vests and gas masks, with AR15 Rifles slung on their shoulders. And YET, none of them helped the police shoot the shooter! WTF! Did the guns have bullets?

mnottertail -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/12/2016 4:30:41 AM)
I see many videos of people running over BLM people with their vehicles, and people glorifying that, seems like there is a great deal of glorification for everyone.

Greta75 -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/12/2016 4:44:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD The one carring the AR who the police talked too didn't have ammo. Why the hell would people carry a giant rifle and not have bullets? Then why bring it anyway??? That is even crazier!!! But the presence of up to 30 people carrying rifles during a protest last week at which 12 police officers were shot complicated law enforcement’s attempts to identify the gunman, Dallas Police Chief David Brown said Monday. That is a good question though, I wonder in such a situation again. How to identify the bad guy when everyone is running around with rifles!

mnottertail -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/12/2016 7:33:35 AM)
Shoot them all and let Allah sort it out.

BamaD -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/12/2016 11:51:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD The one carring the AR who the police talked too didn't have ammo. Why the hell would people carry a giant rifle and not have bullets? Then why bring it anyway??? That is even crazier!!! But the presence of up to 30 people carrying rifles during a protest last week at which 12 police officers were shot complicated law enforcement’s attempts to identify the gunman, Dallas Police Chief David Brown said Monday. That is a good question though, I wonder in such a situation again. How to identify the bad guy when everyone is running around with rifles! A While you are clearly unaware of this, the AR-15 is hardly a "giant rifle". B He was making a point, not looking for trouble.

jlf1961 -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/12/2016 1:21:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD The one carring the AR who the police talked too didn't have ammo. Why the hell would people carry a giant rifle and not have bullets? Then why bring it anyway??? That is even crazier!!! But the presence of up to 30 people carrying rifles during a protest last week at which 12 police officers were shot complicated law enforcement’s attempts to identify the gunman, Dallas Police Chief David Brown said Monday. That is a good question though, I wonder in such a situation again. How to identify the bad guy when everyone is running around with rifles! Greta, once more your ignorance of the subject has led you to make a statement clearly indicating that your grasp of the subject matter is slim at best, although I tend to believe it is nonexistent. To begin with, the AR15 was referred to as a toy when first introduced because it was smaller in both size and weight than the previously issued weapon the M14. The AR weighed half as much as the M14 when fully loaded. The fact he was carrying a weapon with no ammo clearly shows he was making a statement, although given the stress of the situation, or the possible escalation of the situation, might not have been the wisest of moves. Now since I know that google is accessible in Singapore, might I suggest before you go and put your ignorance into a thread once more, you utilize the sources available and thus preventing you from looking foolish. So far, you have suggested a series of solutions that are, as stated in another thread, unconstitutional, illegal under all federal and state laws, have been proven to be flawed in the past both in the US and in other countries, South Africa being the most obvious, and you continue to stand by them. We have a saying in the US, that applies to you. Here's your sign.

Politesub53 -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/12/2016 3:49:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 FR It is sad that there are up to 30 protesters wearing camo gear, bulletproof vests and gas masks, with AR15 Rifles slung on their shoulders. And YET, none of them helped the police shoot the shooter! WTF! http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-dallas-chief-20160711-snap-story.html Your posts get stupider by the day Greta.

jlf1961 -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/13/2016 8:37:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 FR It is sad that there are up to 30 protesters wearing camo gear, bulletproof vests and gas masks, with AR15 Rifles slung on their shoulders. And YET, none of them helped the police shoot the shooter! WTF! http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-dallas-chief-20160711-snap-story.html Greta, There was an incident in which Texans responded to a single shooter (with privately owned weapons that had the police out gunned) and returned fire on a sniper. The incident involved a former marine, and while the police were able to eventually kill the man, and the actions of the civilians who returned fire after being fired on were credited with saving lives, the rest of the US went ape shit about Texans taking the law into their own hands, as did people in other countries. And now, we have on our boards, a citizen of a country in which guns are completely illegal complaining that armed citizens did not return fire. Again, your complete lack of knowledge concerning the laws of the United States and Texas in particular, and the mind set of gun owners have once more enabled you to put your foot in your mouth up to your ass. Greta, here's your sign.

Greta75 -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/13/2016 8:42:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD A While you are clearly unaware of this, the AR-15 is hardly a "giant rifle". B He was making a point, not looking for trouble. It's a giant rifle if you need a sling to carry it. What is the point someone is trying make carrying a gun without bullets in it? I thought guns are for self defense! Need bullets for self-defense!

Greta75 -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/13/2016 8:47:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 There was an incident in which Texans responded to a single shooter (with privately owned weapons that had the police out gunned) and returned fire on a sniper. The incident involved a former marine, and while the police were able to eventually kill the man, and the actions of the civilians who returned fire after being fired on were credited with saving lives, the rest of the US went ape shit about Texans taking the law into their own hands, as did people in other countries. Personally, I would expect people with guns to help the police, if they got a gun, and they saw who was shooting them! I wouldn't see it as taking law into their own hands. Police was getting killed. Alot of them were getting killed. It's just normal to want to help seeing anybody getting killed. I wouldn't know what the rest of the world getting outrage about if in that situation, using the gun was used in defense of people's lives. But I guess the complication of such things is the police still don't know who the shooter is! So I see everyone was just staying out of it, afraid they will be mistaken as the bad guy. quote: a citizen of a country in which guns are completely illegal complaining that armed citizens did not return fire. Coming from a gun-free country is irrelevant. Gun-free means, it's impossible for a situation to happen where police men or civilians are being shot at by guns. So we will never face such a situation. But if we saw people stabbing police, civilians will interfere and help the police, and nobody is gonna accuse them of interfering with the law. Infact those civilians would get bravery medals in my country for helping. But we really love our police over here. They are always super nice. I am sure. In your country's situation, everyone just happened to have guns. And it's for self-defense. If bullets were spraying at you, or others, and you saw who was doing it, and trying to help the situation and save lives, I'd say that's self-defense.

jlf1961 -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/13/2016 9:18:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD A While you are clearly unaware of this, the AR-15 is hardly a "giant rifle". B He was making a point, not looking for trouble. It's a giant rifle if you need a sling to carry it. What is the point someone is trying make carrying a gun without bullets in it? I thought guns are for self defense! Need bullets for self-defense! A sling is not used because of the size of the rifle, slings are used on submachine guns as well. The sling is the same as a freaking holster, so you have your hands free. It is difficult, to use a military example, to hold a rifle, read a map and hold a compass at the same time, unless of course you happen to have 4 arms. As for owning guns and helping police, first, just because you own a gun does not allow the gun owner to enforce the law. A gun owner can use a gun for self defense, but the situation in Dallas was not one in which a gun owner can legally use a gun, as there were police on the scene. In other words, if those gun owners would have fired, given the proximity of police, they would have been committing a felony, and thus be subject to arrest and very long prison stays. Finally, untrained individuals trying to do the right thing usually results in the untrained individuals ending up as DEAD untrained individuals, or in a few innocent civilians becoming dead or injured innocent civilians. A second point, the average gun owner in the United States is not trained to use a gun in a tactical situation. The odds are that those civilians would have done far more damage than help. Once more, here's your sign Greta.

Greta75 -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/13/2016 9:38:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 A gun owner can use a gun for self defense, but the situation in Dallas was not one in which a gun owner can legally use a gun, as there were police on the scene. In other words, if those gun owners would have fired, given the proximity of police, they would have been committing a felony, and thus be subject to arrest and very long prison stays. I think there is a problem with this law. So you got a shooter shooting, the ones that are suppose to protect you are like going down. And it's illegal to help them. So the law expects every single police to be dead, before a civilian can start using their gun to shoot the bad guy? In the meanwhile, just go duck and hide, and watch the police die? That's crazy! I know it's the law, but some laws don't make sense. quote: Finally, untrained individuals trying to do the right thing usually results in the untrained individuals ending up as DEAD untrained individuals, or in a few innocent civilians becoming dead or injured innocent civilians. Personally in this specific situation, where trained individuals were dropping like flies, it doesn't matter trained or untrained anymore.

Awareness -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/13/2016 9:46:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 A second point, the average gun owner in the United States is not trained to use a gun in a tactical situation. The odds are that those civilians would have done far more damage than help. Well then THERE'S NO FUCKING POINT IN THEM BEING ARMED THEN, IS THERE. Christ! You gun nuts claim allowing people to carry weapons is going to magically stop shootings and then when one occurs and all those people armed with assault rifles turn out to be fucking useless you claim they're not trained and thus useless. Make up your fucking mind.

jlf1961 -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/13/2016 9:50:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Greta75 quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 A gun owner can use a gun for self defense, but the situation in Dallas was not one in which a gun owner can legally use a gun, as there were police on the scene. In other words, if those gun owners would have fired, given the proximity of police, they would have been committing a felony, and thus be subject to arrest and very long prison stays. I think there is a problem with this law. So you got a shooter shooting, the ones that are suppose to protect you are like going down. And it's illegal to help them. So the law expects every single police to be dead, before a civilian can start using their gun to shoot the bad guy? In the meanwhile, just go duck and hide, and watch the police die? That's crazy! I know it's the law, but some laws don't make sense. quote: Finally, untrained individuals trying to do the right thing usually results in the untrained individuals ending up as DEAD untrained individuals, or in a few innocent civilians becoming dead or injured innocent civilians. Personally in this specific situation, where trained individuals were dropping like flies, it doesn't matter trained or untrained anymore. As you pointed out, there were a number of civilians with guns. Now, since the shooter did not have a neon arrow pointing to him indicating he was the shooter, how would these individuals know who was not shooting at them or the police? Secondly, and more to the point, if those armed civilians would have started firing in response, there would have probably been a hell of lot of innocent bystanders hit, making an already bad situation much worse. All of your posts are doing more to indicate that you have little or no grasp the reality of such a situation, and are basing your entire thought process on what Hollywood has presented. And since you have not had the inclination to research the "here's your sign" phrase, how about this, given your understanding of reality, how about I sell you a 300 acre piece of beach front property on the Pacific ocean located just outside of Fort Collins Colorado?

Greta75 -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/13/2016 9:50:37 AM)
FR I am still trying to understand the whole logic of carrying a big ass rifle without bullets, to make a statement? What statement? I thought guns are self-defense? Not statements! You carry them because you want protection for yourself. Now you carry them without ammo, whatever for? Decorative? Fashion statement?

jlf1961 -> RE: Breaking News in Dallas (7/13/2016 10:02:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 A second point, the average gun owner in the United States is not trained to use a gun in a tactical situation. The odds are that those civilians would have done far more damage than help. Well then THERE'S NO FUCKING POINT IN THEM BEING ARMED THEN, IS THERE. Christ! You gun nuts claim allowing people to carry weapons is going to magically stop shootings and then when one occurs and all those people armed with assault rifles turn out to be fucking useless you claim they're not trained and thus useless. Make up your fucking mind. If you have paid attention to the argument, it is that properly instructed gun owners can make a difference, in some situations, and have in some cases. Google Charles Whitman. In this situation, where the shooter was not clearly identified, and 30 people randomly trying to figure out who the hell was the bad guy, the odds are very good that a couple of good guys would have ended up being dead good guys. To be honest, speaking as a trained sniper, the situation is to the sniper's advantage. Contrary to what Hollywood would have people believe, in an urban environment, with the sound of the shots echoing off buildings, locating the sniper is not very easy, and damn near impossible. So, let me ask you this, would you have wanted to be on that street with a bunch of people with almost no training except maybe a firearms safety course, trying to take out a single sniper? Hell the standard military way of dealing with a sniper is to call arty in on his/her approximate location, or send a friendly sniper out to try and find the bastard. In the case of mass shootings, such as in schools, properly trained individuals could have made a difference. In those cases you have a damn good idea of who and where the shooter is. Tactically speaking, the situation in Dallas was a nightmare for the police and everyone else. It took police some time to locate the shooter, and they are trained for the job. Then of course you have the stupidity of the individuals who were at a 'peaceful' march brandishing weapons. I am surprised that none of them ended up arrested as suspects or worse, shot for being in the wrong place at the wrong time with a gun.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875