To be fair that is also sometimes actual orders in any closed group like police or military. You can't publicly say anything against the orders of the patrol/group leader while on the job, since confronting him about it will lessen his authority and by extension the organisation's. And newbies aren't always even told how to handle a situation where they'd have to stop a sarge etc going off the rails. Because obviously someone making patrol leader would never be in error...
I had one such incident while serving my mandatory army time. Gate guard duty, some Lt walks by and tells me about a sporting event for people with eyesight disabilities and that X number of civvies will be arriving to the garrison's officer housing area. I ofc call it in to get confirmation (random Lts can't give me orders on guard duty) and later get a new visit from the Lt who chews me out for doing exactly my duty. In the evening there's a civvy wandering about in an area he shouldn't be (not a "you'll get shot at" area but still off-limits without permission). My MP patrol sarge had just woken up and knew nothing about what had happened that day but picked me and another guy to back him up. We found the errant civilian very fast - obviously not blind but with very thick glasses - who claimed a wrong turn when coming from the officer's club in the dark and the sarge rather rudely ordered the guy to walk ahead of our jeep instead of listening to me. Only in the car did he listen to me, then had us pick up the guy and drive him to the housing area he should be in. We were armed and led by a 20 or so old guy who thought this could be a dangerous criminal, and I couldn't tell him what I knew before out of earshot. Luckily for everyone involved this ended without anyone getting beaten or having a gun pointed at him.
d-usa wrote: Would he have been due for a Good Conduct Medal after 5 years, or is the time frame different for Reserves?
No. You only get it for active duty. Time in the Reserves does not count.
He might have gotten the Army Reserve Components Achievement Medal, it's every 3 years, but he'd also have to be recommended by his unit commander. It's not automatic.
Wrong. I was awarded a good Conduct medal during my time in the Marine Reserves.
Maybe it's harder to find well behaved marines, so they get rewarded more?
redleger wrote: Since you seem to continue to want to go in this direction
I was actually content to let the subject rest, as you suggested. I was dragged back in by another poster. You have been very gracious and diplomatic in your responses, and I appreciate that. I apologise for continuing the discussion.
I will ask the direct question, please give a direct answer. How do you recommend people protect themselves from those with no regard for the law, societal customs, regulations, and are ok with doing violence on soft and easy targets?
I think if someone is in immediate mortal peril, then I would recommend they defend themselves by whatever means necessary. However, that is actually not what I was talking about. It is not the gun that I object to, but the rhetoric of fear that goes along with it, and the normalisation and acceptance of violence.
or maybe it is better to have it and not need it then to not have it and need it?/
Still missing the point. If you'd rather have your gun and have a 10%* chance of being shot to death by a burglar than not having a gun and having a 5%* chance of being shot to death by a burglar because society got its collective thumbs out of its collective behind then more power to you.
CptJake wrote: This is allegedly the perp's 'like' or group memberships on facebook. If accurate it may give an indication as to what he considered his motivating factors.
(was shown the link, no idea how accurate it really is)
There's no point posting it then.
Better than speculation he is a white supremacist long after we know he isn't...
And it ends up that is his facebook 'likes'.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
A military lawyer says the man who fatally shot five officers in Dallas was accused of sexual harassment by a female solider when he served in the Army in Afghanistan in May 2014.
Lawyer Bradford Glendening says Micah Johnson was sent back to the U.S. with the recommendation he be removed from the Army with an "other than honorable" discharge.
Glendening, who represented Johnson at the time, said Friday that the recommendation was "highly unusual" since generally counseling is ordered before more drastic steps are taken.
Glendening said Johnson was set to be removed from the Army in September 2014 because of the incident. Instead, Johnson got an honorable discharge the following April — for reasons Gardening doesn't understand.
Probably explains why he was an E3 with as much time as he had and why no ETS award.
That he was allowed an honorable discharge seems a bit odd.
In other attacks on police this weekend so far....
Tennessee has already been mentioned.
In Missouri on Friday, a police officer was shot from behind after he walked back to his patrol car to check the driving status of a black man who he had stopped. Antonio Taylor, 31, was later arrested but the motive for the shooting is unknown
In Georgia on Friday, an officer was shot after he responded to a call from a man who said his car had been broken into. Again the motive is unknown
Probably explains why he was an E3 with as much time as he had and why no ETS award.
That he was allowed an honorable discharge seems a bit odd.
Not really. Once out of theater and out from under the watch of the commander who initiated the action, some crap bag CONUS took the easy way out rather than do the hard right. I've seen it before, way too often. Bad troop yells 'EEO' and/or does a congressional inquiry and the command folds like a blanket.
Probably explains why he was an E3 with as much time as he had and why no ETS award.
That he was allowed an honorable discharge seems a bit odd.
Not really. Once out of theater and out from under the watch of the commander who initiated the action, some crap bag CONUS took the easy way out rather than do the hard right. I've seen it before, way too often. Bad troop yells 'EEO' and/or does a congressional inquiry and the command folds like a blanket.
This, unless the command is willing to put in the time and effort, of which there is a lot required, then its easier to let the Soldier expire his term of service and go on his crappy way.
This, unless the command is willing to put in the time and effort, of which there is a lot required, then its easier to let the Soldier expire his term of service and go on his crappy way.
*sigh*
The US military has been borrowing way too heavily from the civilian side of government. We've got one still on the books at our facility who should have been dismissed 130 odd days ago for her current status as a prison inmate.
This, unless the command is willing to put in the time and effort, of which there is a lot required, then its easier to let the Soldier expire his term of service and go on his crappy way.
*sigh*
The US military has been borrowing way too heavily from the civilian side of government. We've got one still on the books at our facility who should have been dismissed 130 odd days ago for her current status as a prison inmate.
It happens all the time. My last unit, we had two people that we tried to forcibly separate. Both times the Commander just shuffled them somewhere else, to make them someone else's problem. Hate that crap.
Obama is in Poland. So how the hell is he hip deep in De Nile?
I don't think he's wrong, although in my opinion we're slipping in the wrong direction. Look how much of an outlier an event like this was, and compare it to how many bombings were performed by the Weathermen alone, for example. I don't think we're slipping back to Jim Crow laws, either - I do think that voter ID laws are aimed at disenfranchising people but not strictly on racial grounds, but by voting factions. That's a whole other thread so I don't want to pull that string, but I mean, compare that to the institutionalized racism of the 60s - segregated housing, George Wallace in the schoolhouse door... gak, there were still lynchings in the 60s.
That was on Thursday, and indeed what has been reported seems consistent with suicide. But of course if more evidence comes out I will correct my statement.
well it seems one city has learned from Dallas, by closing up the Capitol during a BLM rally, but it makes one wonder why the rally now if no one there to protest too?
So I read today that yesterday there was a police officer shot by a black man here in Tennessee, after responding to him shooting 3 other white people on a highway, killing one of them.
That makes 15 police officers targeted and shot in a 24 hour period, by my count. 12 in Dallas, 1 in St. Louis, 1 in Atlanta, and 1 in TN. Anyone hear of anymore stories?
djones520 wrote: So I read today that yesterday there was a police officer shot by a black man here in Tennessee, after responding to him shooting 3 other white people on a highway, killing one of them.
That makes 15 police officers targeted and shot in a 24 hour period, by my count. 12 in Dallas, 1 in St. Louis, 1 in Atlanta, and 1 in TN. Anyone hear of anymore stories?
Aside from those instances you mentioned thankfully not. The Dallas incident does bring back memories of the two LEOs ambushed in New York a few years ago
The good thing is that as long as violent crime continues to go down, there really isn't any reason to pass any kind of laws or to change our policies just because of a few mass shootings.
d-usa wrote: The good thing is that as long as violent crime continues to go down, there really isn't any reason to pass any kind of laws or to change our policies just because of a few mass shootings.
In the event that you are serious what laws would you like to see passed that would have prevented this?
d-usa wrote: The good thing is that as long as violent crime continues to go down, there really isn't any reason to pass any kind of laws or to change our policies just because of a few mass shootings.
In the event that you are serious what laws would you like to see passed that would have prevented this?
I know you asked D about this, but I would like to weigh in. I don't think any single piece of legislation, or even a group of reactionary laws, could've prevented what is the result of centuries of systematic and institutional persecution and disenfranchisement of blacks, the recent militarization of the police and whole other host of factors. This shooting is in many ways a symptom of America's incredibly flawed society and I doubt someone on a wargaming forum could give you a comprehensive answer as to how to correct it. I doubt anyone has a good single answer.
d-usa wrote: The good thing is that as long as violent crime continues to go down, there really isn't any reason to pass any kind of laws or to change our policies just because of a few mass shootings.
In the event that you are serious what laws would you like to see passed that would have prevented this?
I know you asked D about this, but I would like to weigh in. I don't think any single piece of legislation, or even a group of reactionary laws, could've prevented what is the result of centuries of systematic and institutional persecution and disenfranchisement of blacks, the recent militarization of the police and whole other host of factors. This shooting is in many ways a symptom of America's incredibly flawed society and I doubt someone on a wargaming forum could give you a comprehensive answer as to how to correct it. I doubt anyone has a good single answer.
There are plenty of people who have solid pointers for what to replace society with but how is considerably more difficult to answer (or, if you're pessimistic, easy but depressing...).
d-usa wrote: The good thing is that as long as violent crime continues to go down, there really isn't any reason to pass any kind of laws or to change our policies just because of a few mass shootings.
In the event that you are serious what laws would you like to see passed that would have prevented this?
I know you asked D about this, but I would like to weigh in. I don't think any single piece of legislation, or even a group of reactionary laws, could've prevented what is the result of centuries of systematic and institutional persecution and disenfranchisement of blacks, the recent militarization of the police and whole other host of factors. This shooting is in many ways a symptom of America's incredibly flawed society and I doubt someone on a wargaming forum could give you a comprehensive answer as to how to correct it. I doubt anyone has a good single answer.
In terms of "police militarization" I read (can't remember where, there have been dozens of stories), that many of the Dallas police officers had chosen not to wear their PPE because of all of the concern about "militarization". They had left them behind, because they wanted to present that friendlier image...
redleger wrote: Since you seem to continue to want to go in this direction
I was actually content to let the subject rest, as you suggested. I was dragged back in by another poster. You have been very gracious and diplomatic in your responses, and I appreciate that. I apologise for continuing the discussion.
I will ask the direct question, please give a direct answer. How do you recommend people protect themselves from those with no regard for the law, societal customs, regulations, and are ok with doing violence on soft and easy targets?
I think if someone is in immediate mortal peril, then I would recommend they defend themselves by whatever means necessary. However, that is actually not what I was talking about. It is not the gun that I object to, but the rhetoric of fear that goes along with it, and the normalisation and acceptance of violence.
or maybe it is better to have it and not need it then to not have it and need it?/
Still missing the point. If you'd rather have your gun and have a 10%* chance of being shot to death by a burglar than not having a gun and having a 5%* chance of being shot to death by a burglar because society got its collective thumbs out of its collective behind then more power to you.
*Figures used for ilustrative purposes only.
I would rather have my gun and be 10% more likely to be killed by an assailant with a gun, than not have my gun and be 5% likely to be killed by an assailant with a gun. That's my personal preference, but I can certainly understand how others would prefer differently.
*Figures also just illustrative.
That preference is partly based on self reliance as well as the fact that I can't count on others for help while living in the middle of nowhere, partly based on experience being in situations where I don't have means to defend myself (and realizing how much that sucks) and partly on actual experience having had guns drawn on me (which is a risk I'm willing to take in return). But again, I realize that isn't the paradigm for everyone.
What's this I'm hearing from Sky about a threat to a Dallas police station? Swat teams setting up a perimeter? Police snipers? Sky says the threat came from a group known to the police?
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: What's this I'm hearing from Sky about a threat to a Dallas police station? Swat teams setting up a perimeter? Police snipers? Sky says the threat came from a group known to the police?
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: What's this I'm hearing from Sky about a threat to a Dallas police station? Swat teams setting up a perimeter? Police snipers? Sky says the threat came from a group known to the police?
More anonymous threats that they're (obviously) taking serious...
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: What's this I'm hearing from Sky about a threat to a Dallas police station? Swat teams setting up a perimeter? Police snipers? Sky says the threat came from a group known to the police?
More anonymous threats that they're (obviously) taking serious...
djones520 wrote: So I read today that yesterday there was a police officer shot by a black man here in Tennessee, after responding to him shooting 3 other white people on a highway, killing one of them.
That makes 15 police officers targeted and shot in a 24 hour period, by my count. 12 in Dallas, 1 in St. Louis, 1 in Atlanta, and 1 in TN. Anyone hear of anymore stories?
Aside from those instances you mentioned thankfully not. The Dallas incident does bring back memories of the two LEOs ambushed in New York a few years ago
The two shot in the head in a patrol car? That was only 18 months ago
Shadow Captain Edithae wrote: What's this I'm hearing from Sky about a threat to a Dallas police station? Swat teams setting up a perimeter? Police snipers? Sky says the threat came from a group known to the police?
More anonymous threats that they're (obviously) taking serious...
Do you think there's any irony in the fact he's now a Fox News commentator?
the whole last decade has been ironic.
just read this story and it make me sad especially that a BLM group thought a protest in Dallas which was actually working with the community was even needed:
Well, it's just one isolated event in the grand scheme of things. But Oklahoma City had our big #BLM protest today.
They planned to march this afternoon from a historic black church on the east side, and end up in the heart of our entertainment district. In light of thousands and thousands of "angry protesters" the local baseball team rescheduled their game from the afternoon to noon and local businesses in Bricktown decided to shut down early.
In the end we ended up with 1,000-2,000 protesters participating in a peaceful march with a heavy police presence. #BLM protesters, white and black, shook hands with and hugged police officers that were assigned to the march and protest. As expected, the event was peaceful.
d-usa wrote: Well, it's just one isolated event in the grand scheme of things. But Oklahoma City had our big #BLM protest today.
They planned to march this afternoon from a historic black church on the east side, and end up in the heart of our entertainment district. In light of thousands and thousands of "angry protesters" the local baseball team rescheduled their game from the afternoon to noon and local businesses in Bricktown decided to shut down early.
In the end we ended up with 1,000-2,000 protesters participating in a peaceful march with a heavy police presence. #BLM protesters, white and black, shook hands with and hugged police officers that were assigned to the march and protest. As expected, the event was peaceful.
Before this weekend, there were black militants calling for violence against police. Now that Dallas police have had a chance to catch their breath so to speak, they're investigating if there is any connection. Are these attacks on police in Dallas and elsewhere being coordinated by black militants or simply inspired by them? If either can be proven then the militants could possibly face prison for inciting.
BigWaaagh wrote: Saw this and wasn't surprised. I've been trying to stay on top of this thread, but if I missed this already having been posted, my apologies.
I'd actually post this in our thread about Philando Castile, as it is relevant to that incident as well (maybe more so). I think there's substance to the thought that expanded CCP presents a significant issue for law enforcement and citizens interacting with each other.
BigWaaagh wrote: Saw this and wasn't surprised. I've been trying to stay on top of this thread, but if I missed this already having been posted, my apologies.
I'd actually post this in our thread about Philando Castile, as it is relevant to that incident as well (maybe more so). I think there's substance to the thought that expanded CCP presents a significant issue for law enforcement and citizens interacting with each other.
Then why are shooting of that type so rare? If it were really a problem, gun control advocates would be using it (police officer safety) as the spear point of their movement. The truth is that people carrying firearms get pulled over for traffic stops in every state in the Union. As long as the CCP holder behaves responsibly the stop is almost always resolved without incident. I maintain that what happened with Philando Castile was the cop's fault, not Philando Castile's, and had the cop done his job properly nobody would be dead and none of us would even know Philando Castile's name. He'd be just one more person who got a ticket/warning for a busted tail light and sent on his way.
As to BigWaaagh's link, it's just one more anti-gun column with the main quotes coming from a Democrat, pro-gun control mayor. His statements on open carry do not show he has interpreted the facts correctly and should not be taken as some sort of evidence for, well, anything. Was there confusion immediately during the shooting? Yes. Was most of it cleared up quickly? Also yes. Were the gun owners brought in for questioning treated professionally and with dignity? Again, yes. That Mayor Mike Rawlings uses this tragedy to pitch President Obama's anti-gun drive should not be a surprise to anyone.
I don't think it means shootings will happen. I think it means that only a stupid cop would ever not be wary of someone with a weapon on their person, whether they are permitted to carry it or not. The only sensible responses are to acknowledge the presence of the weapon and keep it in mind. Its a situation that introduces further uncertainty and unease into situations that are already generally uneasy and uncertain. EDIT: In some ways, it is probably safer for officers. There's no wondering if someone is carrying if they tell you they are, but I don't think any smart cop should ever respond to the words "I'm carrying" dismissively, under any circumstance.
That isn't an argument that CCP is a "problem." It's an argument that we shouldn't ignore the elephant in the room if we're allowing elephants in the room. That's an attitude that pervades nearly all sides of every talk about guns in this country, and it's produced a gun debate that runs on ideology (left and right) absent reality.
Castile according to the local sheriff does not have a record of him having a CWP(two day old info, might have changed). The only word we have gotten he had one was the woman on the video after the fact. Also if he attended the class, he should already have had his wallet on his lap.
-Gun was a Saiga AK-74 which actually Obama has had banned from import for the last 3 years. As with usual, media at first called it an AR-15. Then it was reported to be an SKS. Finally its an AK-74.
Out of curiosity does anyone find it disturbing that they used a drone to blow the guy up? Not saying he didn't deserve it or anything. But the fact police used high explosives remotely is kind of spooky.
Col. Dash wrote: Castile according to the local sheriff does not have a record of him having a CWP(two day old info, might have changed). The only word we have gotten he had one was the woman on the video after the fact. Also if he attended the class, he should already have had his wallet on his lap.
-Gun was a Saiga AK-74 which actually Obama has had banned from import for the last 3 years. As with usual, media at first called it an AR-15. Then it was reported to be an SKS. Finally its an AK-74.
Out of curiosity does anyone find it disturbing that they used a drone to blow the guy up? Not saying he didn't deserve it or anything. But the fact police used high explosives remotely is kind of spooky.
I understand why a big PD would have a bomb bot, and if you have a bomb bot it should be able to take out suspected bombs, so I'm okay with the capability.
And just like when you provide a capability to a soldier, when you provide it to a cop they are going to figure out ways to use that capability much differently than intended by the engineers/systems guys who provide the capability.
In this particular case, you got a guy holed up, known to be armed and willing, even eager to kill cops, claims he has IEDs/bombs, refuses to give up, at that point there really one end state; dead crap bag. So, how do you achieve the end state without losing more good guys? The cops found a solution.
Honestly I'm not sure how you use high explosives except remotely. It isn't like a cop is gonna be there when they detonate. Even if hand placed, the cop will go back to a safe distance and remotely detonate the explosives. I guess you could toss a grenade/charge on a short time fuse and hope for the best, but placement is spotty compared to using a 'bot or hand emplacing the charge.
I know if I was the cop facing the decision to run into this guy's line of fire to cap him, or using the bomb bot, my choice would not be running into his line of fire.
Col. Dash wrote: Castile according to the local sheriff does not have a record of him having a CWP(two day old info, might have changed). The only word we have gotten he had one was the woman on the video after the fact. Also if he attended the class, he should already have had his wallet on his lap.
-Gun was a Saiga AK-74 which actually Obama has had banned from import for the last 3 years. As with usual, media at first called it an AR-15. Then it was reported to be an SKS. Finally its an AK-74.
Out of curiosity does anyone find it disturbing that they used a drone to blow the guy up? Not saying he didn't deserve it or anything. But the fact police used high explosives remotely is kind of spooky.
I understand why a big PD would have a bomb bot, and if you have a bomb bot it should be able to take out suspected bombs, so I'm okay with the capability.
And just like when you provide a capability to a soldier, when you provide it to a cop they are going to figure out ways to use that capability much differently than intended by the engineers/systems guys who provide the capability.
In this particular case, you got a guy holed up, known to be armed and willing, even eager to kill cops, claims he has IEDs/bombs, refuses to give up, at that point there really one end state; dead crap bag. So, how do you achieve the end state without losing more good guys? The cops found a solution.
Honestly I'm not sure how you use high explosives except remotely. It isn't like a cop is gonna be there when they detonate. Even if hand placed, the cop will go back to a safe distance and remotely detonate the explosives. I guess you could toss a grenade/charge on a short time fuse and hope for the best, but placement is spotty compared to using a 'bot or hand emplacing the charge.
I know if I was the cop facing the decision to run into this guy's line of fire to cap him, or using the bomb bot, my choice would not be running into his line of fire.
This. Many of the people asking why the bot was necessary have probably never had incoming fire for any sustained period of time. It man controlled, not some non-existant AI running round blowing up humans.
Also for him to have scored that many hits using that weapon, which is not known for its accuracy with the wanna be ACOG meant he was just praying and spraying if you will. I heard there was a lot of gun fire, so maybe he wasn't a well trained sniper after all. Seems he scored hits through volume of fire.
I've been reading about and watching coverage of BLM protest marches in Louisiana, as a reaction to the Dallas events, and it seems people's constitutional rights are going out the window.
Not only 1st and 4th amendment violations, but we have one of those very rare, once every 200 years, instances of somebody's 3rd amendment rights being possibly violated
The inaccuracy of the AK series is fairly over-stated. A man sized target at 200 yards isn't super hard to hit with one with an aimed shot. A well zeroed and practiced AK-74 which is the upgrade to the AK-47 would not have had an issue in the shooting. The round is fairly accurate. I think a lot of our interpretation of the AK series being inaccurate is we always see either Hollywood misrepresenting it like they do everything gun and ballistics related or news feeds of undisciplined terrorists just standing there either shooting from the hip or unloading full mags on auto.
This shooter was using semi-auto taking selective shots for his initial spree. Catching them by surprise he easily could have taken down as many as he did. If he was firing full auto or rapidly he wouldn't have been as successful as he was. In the video he was still only firing one or two rounds before moving so he at least had decent trigger discipline.
His real mistake was he fired more than a round or two and didn't leave. He should have fired off a round and moved out before cops figured out his firing position. So its obvious at least in regard to sniper training he was untrained.
Has anyone heard about the other three people who were arrested in relation to this and were being uncooperative to the police? They kind of fell off the earth in regard to being in the news.
Aye, there's nothing really wrong with the accuracy of an AK*, proper factory made AK's out of military arsenals will meet the US military standards of acceptance for the M4/M16. It's harder to get the same top end accuracy out of one that you can get out of an AR, but they're more than accurate enough to successfully engage targets with iron sights at 300m
*(so long as it's a properly built AK, crappy barrels and poor rebuilds of imported parts kits will result in poor accuracy, which is unfortunately common with AK's on the US market)
That said, given that we've had 3 or 4 different claims as to the weapon the shooter used, is the '74-style Saiga definitively the weapon used now?
Has anyone heard about the other three people who were arrested in relation to this and were being uncooperative to the police? They kind of fell off the earth in regard to being in the news.
From what I've gathered they were just the open carry people. So them being uncooperative could be pretty standard if they just sat there ranting about how it was their right to carry their rifle etc.
Has anyone heard about the other three people who were arrested in relation to this and were being uncooperative to the police? They kind of fell off the earth in regard to being in the news.
From what I've gathered they were just the open carry people. So them being uncooperative could be pretty standard if they just sat there ranting about how it was their right to carry their rifle etc.
No information has been released regarding them, as of the most detailed stories I've read. Thanks for your supposition though that it's just "gun nuts ranting about their rights".
Never mind you are baiting. I agree its poor form. And as with many sets of iconology, it can be perverted, and this group would definately get some kick back from me personally, but we are currently banned from OKC.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote: Did you wave a confederate flag at the OKC #BLM protest?
nope, nor would I ever. I would like to think I'm smart enough to know better, and further more it is an inflammatory statement to do so. I also do not participate in any form of political protest since it could lead to issue based on my current employment. If I was, I would not attend a BLM parade, nor any other possible movement that could potentially lead to harm to myself, my family or my background check.
I also do not participate in any form of political protest since it could lead to issue based on my current employment.
I feel the same way. I wonder how many other citizens also feel this way?
I am not even in the military, but I know that my 1st Amendments rights do not apply to an employer in a right to work state.
If I'm going to take a day off from work to do something it better be more worthwhile than risking arrest in a vain attempt to get the attention of some politician(s) that already don't care what I think anyway.
I also do not participate in any form of political protest since it could lead to issue based on my current employment.
I feel the same way. I wonder how many other citizens also feel this way?
I am not even in the military, but I know that my 1st Amendments rights do not apply to an employer in a right to work state.
If I'm going to take a day off from work to do something it better be more worthwhile than risking arrest in a vain attempt to get the attention of some politician(s) that already don't care what I think anyway.
#Apathy!
That's another reason many people do not participate in the political process beyond the occasional vote and/or email to a congress critter.
Not related to Dallas or anti police sentiment in general. An inmate at the courthouse for arraignment/trial broke free and stole a bailiff's gun and tried to shoot his way out of the courthouse and escape. He shot two bailiff's and a deputy and a couple civilians. An inmate attempting a jail break is a very different scenario than people targeting working cops for assassination.
Not related to Dallas or anti police sentiment in general. An inmate at the courthouse for arraignment/trial broke free and stole a bailiff's gun and tried to shoot his way out of the courthouse and escape. He shot two bailiff's and a deputy and a couple civilians. An inmate attempting a jail break is a very different scenario than people targeting working cops for assassination.
But it does show how easy it is to get a gun without a background check.
Not related to Dallas or anti police sentiment in general. An inmate at the courthouse for arraignment/trial broke free and stole a bailiff's gun and tried to shoot his way out of the courthouse and escape. He shot two bailiff's and a deputy and a couple civilians. An inmate attempting a jail break is a very different scenario than people targeting working cops for assassination.
But it does show how easy it is to get a gun without a background check.
Not related to Dallas or anti police sentiment in general. An inmate at the courthouse for arraignment/trial broke free and stole a bailiff's gun and tried to shoot his way out of the courthouse and escape. He shot two bailiff's and a deputy and a couple civilians. An inmate attempting a jail break is a very different scenario than people targeting working cops for assassination.
But it does show how easy it is to get a gun without a background check.
In Washington D.C., police were shot at by someone in a SUV. Fortunately it seems that nobody was hurt and the five people in the SUV were taken into custody.
Still, it boils my blood to see people associated with BLM promoting hate and not being disavowed for it.
In Washington D.C., police were shot at by someone in a SUV. Fortunately it seems that nobody was hurt and the five people in the SUV were taken into custody.
Still, it boils my blood to see people associated with BLM promoting hate and not being disavowed for it.
Ehm, where in that article does it say that it has anything to do with BLM at all?
Yes, I read it twice and am mystified as well. What is the connection? Are BLM now responsible for disavowing every police shooting that happens regardless of the details? Should they also be called upon to disavow the white guy that tried to shoot his way out of prison from earlier on this page?
mcVeigh wasn't a conservative.
I apologize categorically for anyone who does violence on behalf of ending abortions. Now going for the last slice of pizza, thats of course perfectly acceptable.
Breotan wrote: In Washington D.C., police were shot at by someone in a SUV. Fortunately it seems that nobody was hurt and the five people in the SUV were taken into custody.
Hey, that's what I call great policework! Officers get shot at and not only refrain from killing the perps on the spot but get them to surrender peacefully! Maybe this is a new beginning after all? I hope so.
Breotan wrote: In Washington D.C., police were shot at by someone in a SUV. Fortunately it seems that nobody was hurt and the five people in the SUV were taken into custody.
Hey, that's what I call great policework! Officers get shot at and not only refrain from killing the perps on the spot but get them to surrender peacefully! Maybe this is a new beginning after all? I hope so.
actually, contrary to what the media and most on this site would tell you, that is closer to the norm.
Breotan wrote: In Washington D.C., police were shot at by someone in a SUV. Fortunately it seems that nobody was hurt and the five people in the SUV were taken into custody.
Hey, that's what I call great policework! Officers get shot at and not only refrain from killing the perps on the spot but get them to surrender peacefully! Maybe this is a new beginning after all? I hope so.
actually, contrary to what the media and most on this site would tell you, that is closer to the norm.
Frazzled wrote: mcVeigh wasn't a conservative.
I apologize categorically for anyone who does violence on behalf of ending abortions. Now going for the last slice of pizza, thats of course perfectly acceptable.
Does that work?
He was indeed a conservative. Right wing anti-government. That makes him a conservative.
Okay...You apologized...Now everyone else needs to
Anti government doesn't make you a conservative. After all the the point of the Weathermen was to bring the govenrment down. No one accused Bill Ayers (the Weatherman who helped murder a cop and now a tenured Illinois professor) of being conservative.
Conservatives work to preserve the status quo. Thats why they're called "conservative."
Frazzled wrote: mcVeigh wasn't a conservative.
I apologize categorically for anyone who does violence on behalf of ending abortions. Now going for the last slice of pizza, thats of course perfectly acceptable.
Does that work?
He was indeed a conservative. Right wing anti-government. That makes him a conservative.
Okay...You apologized...Now everyone else needs to
McVeigh was anti-government whacko.
He didn't fit in any right-wing ideology. He's been know to be agnotistic and some of his political beliefs were more libertarian.
I don't mean to drag this off topic but is anyone else kinda annoyed that the shooter keeps being refereed to as a sniper. I haven't heard what kind of weapon he was using but why are they calling him that.
He wasn't a sniper in the military
He wasn't engaging from a long distance
His accuracy was not even close to sniper level.
I believe I read he was shooting from about 200 yards (not sure on that). I'm probably being needlessly picky. But just curious
I get that. Lord knows when I was a sniper in the military we spent more time training on camouflage,stalking,evasion, and surveillance than we did shooting. Not that we didn't shoot a lot either. I'm just being too picky. I'll stop derailing the thread now.
Of course it does. But most people don't know what being a sniper entails. Most people only know that sniper are good shots and engage from concealed positions.
yellowfever wrote: Of course it does. But most people don't know what being a sniper entails. Most people only know that sniper are good shots and engage from concealed positions.
He also had a sniper rifle though, probably even a tactical and/or assault sniper rifle.
yellowfever wrote: Of course it does. But most people don't know what being a sniper entails. Most people only know that sniper are good shots and engage from concealed positions.
He also had a sniper rifle though, probably even a tactical and/or assault sniper rifle.
/ducks
D-USA, once again baiting with a horrible statement like that. That talk is what makes people think those things exist.
yellowfever wrote: I tried finding out what he used. One source said it was an SKS. another source said it was an AK74 with a red dot.
an SKS look very similar to an AK-47, and is simply the non fully automatic upgraded version. A sniper rifle it most certainly is not. The optic on it was either a red dot or ACOG knock off, neither of which are for long range, although both can be used effectively at 300+ meters.
Was NOT a sniper rifle. A sporting rilfe sure. Just because it has optics of some sort doesn't make it a sniper rifle. Its a Saiga AK-74 which currently is banned from import since its from a Russian manufacturer. You can buy the optics on Amazon, and while the picture isn't close enough for detail, I am betting it was a cheap knockoff or clone.
They do actually make "sniper/marksman" rifles similar to AK. Dragunovs, which for the cost of one you could likely buy about a half dozen of these or you can get Romanian version, a PSL, which is much cheaper but still more costly than this. I had one for awhile, it was very uncomfortable to shoot so I sold it. Looked cool as hell though, but the thin barrel gets hot too quickly.
yellowfever wrote: I tried finding out what he used. One source said it was an SKS. another source said it was an AK74 with a red dot.
an SKS look very similar to an AK-47, and is simply the non fully automatic upgraded version.
Completely false. The SKS was developed at the tail end of WW2 by a different designer and served in the Soviet army for a short time before being replaced completely by the AK.
yellowfever wrote: I tried finding out what he used. One source said it was an SKS. another source said it was an AK74 with a red dot.
an SKS look very similar to an AK-47, and is simply the non fully automatic upgraded version.
Completely false. The SKS was developed at the tail end of WW2 by a different designer and served in the Soviet army for a short time before being replaced completely by the AK.
The shooter used a Saiga AK-74 with a scope.
yep, I had mini brain hemorrhage and I have unscrewed myself. Thank you for the clarification.
Sadly real Dragunovs are about $15k and PSL's, while visually similar, are modified AK's built in RPK receivers as opposed to Dragunov clones.
The choice of a 5.45 Saiga is interesting. Looks like it has a magpul stock with a non converted handguard. The tapco mag is also an interesting choice, but theyre cheap I guess. Not sure what optic that is in the pic though.
Vaktathi wrote: Sadly real Dragunovs are about $15k and PSL's, while visually similar, are modified AK's built in RPK receivers as opposed to Dragunov clones.
The choice of a 5.45 Saiga is interesting. Looks like it has a magpul stock with a non converted handguard. The tapco mag is also an interesting choice, but theyre cheap I guess. Not sure what optic that is in the pic though.
Looks to be a cheap knock off brand. Guessing max range on it is 500m same as the rifle. Throw in another 100m on the range if he adjust up on center mass. Wonder where he Battle Sighted it.
Jihadin wrote: Looks to be a cheap knock off brand. Guessing max range on it is 500m same as the rifle. Throw in another 100m on the range if he adjust up on center mass. Wonder where he Battle Sighted it.
At what range were the initial shots taken? It sounds like he just basically starting dumping into a crowd of cops, and the other fatality was from the cop who rushed him. Does anybody have a play by play?
From what I understand he started in the columns. Trap shot a LEO there and ensured the LEO was not getting up again. Proceeded to enter a building. Began firing from different locations in the building. When the LEO's set up road blocks he had them in the "Box". Seems he was firing from within the building being the LEO's had no idea where the shots were coming from. Once direction of fire was determined the "Shooter" withdrew and shot at another two LEO's getting into the parking through a door it seems. Then he holed up in a Dead Space of a building.
Well, he might have bought one earlier and just decided to go with it. Right now you can get an AR-15 clone cheaper. IIRC the 5.45 ammo was made specifically to be equally useful as the NATO 5.56 round. Better long-range accuracy than the older 7.62x39 and high velocity to give it a pretty straight trajectory. So useful in open-field engagements and all that.
Well, he might have bought one earlier and just decided to go with it. Right now you can get an AR-15 clone cheaper. IIRC the 5.45 ammo was made specifically to be equally useful as the NATO 5.56 round. Better long-range accuracy than the older 7.62x39 and high velocity to give it a pretty straight trajectory. So useful in open-field engagements and all that.
I know a lot of people that bought 5.45 uppers a few years back because the ammo was plentiful and cheap. If the murderer had found a source for inexpensive ammo he may have just gone with whatever rifle he could readily find in that caliber. I don't know about Texas but 5.56 has gotten a bit pricey locally.
Ive got a 5.45 AK and I really enjoy it, its just not a terribly popular platform, most places dont even carry the ammo, and while cheap, its not as cheap as it used to be. I had to go out of my way to buy one and find places to buy ammo to feed it, mags are either expensive ($~40-50) or lacking critical features (e.g. the $15 Tapco mag it looks like he used lacks steel locking lugs and can shear), for someone going off and comitting a shooting like this it just seems an odd choice, though obviously not an ineffective one.
Vaktathi wrote: Ive got a 5.45 AK and I really enjoy it, its just not a terribly popular platform, most places dont even carry the ammo, and while cheap, its not as cheap as it used to be. I had to go out of my way to buy one and find places to buy ammo to feed it, mags are either expensive ($~40-50) or lacking critical features (e.g. the $15 Tapco mag it looks like he used lacks steel locking lugs and can shear), for someone going off and comitting a shooting like this it just seems an odd choice, though obviously not an ineffective one.
He bought the AK in a private sale so it could have just been that the guy he bought it from got it a while ago when 5.45 and was looking to sell it at the time when the murderer was looking to buy something.
Micah Johnson never balked at the $600 asking price for an AK-47 assault rifle. The buy was arranged via Facebook, and consummated in the parking lot of a Target.
Seller Colton Crews forgot about the deal until last week, when ex-Army reservist Johnson killed five Dallas police officers — and federal investigators tracked Crews down.
“I don’t even know how I feel about it right now,” Crews told the Daily News. “I have no idea. It’s awful. It’s just bad.”
Crews, 26, said there was no inkling during their 15-minute November 2014 transaction that Johnson was anything except a military veteran and a solid citizen.
...
Crews specifically asked a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent if his old weapon played a part in the law enforcement carnage.
“He said, ‘All we can say is it was recovered, we’re just finding out everything we can,’” Crews said. “He didn’t say it was the one he used. I hope to God it wasn’t. I hope I’m not that close to all this.”
Vaktathi wrote: Thats gotta be awkward. Im so glad I dont have to deal with that...
Yeah, I mean he would've passed his background check if he bought at a store so it's not like the seller did anything wrong but still, that's a terrible feeling.
Vaktathi wrote: Thats gotta be awkward. Im so glad I dont have to deal with that...
Yeah, I mean he would've passed his background check if he bought at a store so it's not like the seller did anything wrong but still, that's a terrible feeling.
Yeah, nothing bad on the sellers part.
Somewhat related, one of my firearms instructors has a pretty solid policy for private sales of any of his guns. He just draws up a little paper with the serial number and other information that he and the seller both sign, and he makes a copy of their drivers license, and then keeps them together in a lock box. Just so that in case the gun ever ends up being used in a crime and somebody knocks on his door he can go to his box and say "I sold it on this day to this person, here is their info, have a good day".
Vaktathi wrote: Thats gotta be awkward. Im so glad I dont have to deal with that...
Yeah, I mean he would've passed his background check if he bought at a store so it's not like the seller did anything wrong but still, that's a terrible feeling.
Yeah, nothing bad on the sellers part.
Somewhat related, one of my firearms instructors has a pretty solid policy for private sales of any of his guns. He just draws up a little paper with the serial number and other information that he and the seller both sign, and he makes a copy of their drivers license, and then keeps them together in a lock box. Just so that in case the gun ever ends up being used in a crime and somebody knocks on his door he can go to his box and say "I sold it on this day to this person, here is their info, have a good day".
Seems like a good idea. Almost a kind of "register" keeping track of which of his guns have been sold and to whom
Vaktathi wrote: Thats gotta be awkward. Im so glad I dont have to deal with that...
Yeah, I mean he would've passed his background check if he bought at a store so it's not like the seller did anything wrong but still, that's a terrible feeling.
Yeah, nothing bad on the sellers part.
Somewhat related, one of my firearms instructors has a pretty solid policy for private sales of any of his guns. He just draws up a little paper with the serial number and other information that he and the seller both sign, and he makes a copy of their drivers license, and then keeps them together in a lock box. Just so that in case the gun ever ends up being used in a crime and somebody knocks on his door he can go to his box and say "I sold it on this day to this person, here is their info, have a good day".
Seems like a good idea. Almost a kind of "register" keeping track of which of his guns have been sold and to whom
One never accessed by the Feds or any other gov't agency unless he chooses to share the info with them. I'm sure you'll recognize the difference between what he is doing and a mandatory Federal registry of all guns/owners.
Anyone covered the fact that Former Miss Alabama called the gunman a Martyr? or that a Psychist tried to justify that by making a comparison to a elementary school bully getting punched in the face. (Cops are the bully, the person punching the bully is the dallas sniper)
Saw a report that the perp did not have a ton of bomb making materials, he had tannerite and some acetone. Seeing as he trained up doing 'combat shooting courses' the tannerite could very well have been training/target materials.
SemperMortis wrote: Anyone covered the fact that Former Miss Alabama called the gunman a Martyr? or that a Psychist tried to justify that by making a comparison to a elementary school bully getting punched in the face. (Cops are the bully, the person punching the bully is the dallas sniper)
Freedom of speech, if you want to call yourself an American deal with it.
Vaktathi wrote: Thats gotta be awkward. Im so glad I dont have to deal with that...
Yeah, I mean he would've passed his background check if he bought at a store so it's not like the seller did anything wrong but still, that's a terrible feeling.
Yeah, nothing bad on the sellers part.
Somewhat related, one of my firearms instructors has a pretty solid policy for private sales of any of his guns. He just draws up a little paper with the serial number and other information that he and the seller both sign, and he makes a copy of their drivers license, and then keeps them together in a lock box. Just so that in case the gun ever ends up being used in a crime and somebody knocks on his door he can go to his box and say "I sold it on this day to this person, here is their info, have a good day".
Seems like a good idea. Almost a kind of "register" keeping track of which of his guns have been sold and to whom
problem with that is its after the fact that such a list would even crop up and to be honest they don't care really unless illegal, but meanwhile if the government wanted to remove all weapons from everyone such a list would be useful.
SemperMortis wrote: Anyone covered the fact that Former Miss Alabama called the gunman a Martyr? or that a Psychologist tried to justify that by making a comparison to a elementary school bully getting punched in the face. (Cops are the bully, the person punching the bully is the dallas sniper)
Freedom of speech, if you want to call yourself an American deal with it.
Never said they weren't entitled to say whatever the hell they want, but it does show how this has become a significant problem based on race. The new Harvard study shows how police forces handle deadly shootings and it paints a completely different picture then the one that BLM wants everyone to believe in.
The fact that a Psychologist and a Miss Alabama both come out with ridiculous statements just shows how damaging false information can be.
SemperMortis wrote: The new Harvard study shows how police forces handle deadly shootings and it paints a completely different picture then the one that BLM wants everyone to believe in.
SemperMortis wrote: The new Harvard study shows how police forces handle deadly shootings and it paints a completely different picture then the one that BLM wants everyone to believe in.
SemperMortis wrote: Anyone covered the fact that Former Miss Alabama called the gunman a Martyr? or that a Psychist tried to justify that by making a comparison to a elementary school bully getting punched in the face. (Cops are the bully, the person punching the bully is the dallas sniper)
So, uh, why exactly does anyone care what the former Miss Alabama had to say on this subject? Does she have some credentials as an expert authority on police violence, or is this only "newsworthy" because the right-wing outrage machine needs to find someone saying stuff to get outraged about?
SemperMortis wrote: Anyone covered the fact that Former Miss Alabama called the gunman a Martyr? or that a Psychist tried to justify that by making a comparison to a elementary school bully getting punched in the face. (Cops are the bully, the person punching the bully is the dallas sniper)
So, uh, why exactly does anyone care what the former Miss Alabama had to say on this subject? Does she have some credentials as an expert authority on police violence, or is this only "newsworthy" because the right-wing outrage machine needs to find someone saying stuff to get outraged about?
Well if you can pull your left leaning sun glasses off for a minute, it isn't that big of a deal but it does have two implications and problems. 1: She is a relatively influential person because of the Miss Alabama thing, She is using that bit of fame and notoriety to push a terrible opinion forward into the public eye. and 2: The fact that anyone would believe such a narrative and turn the Dallas Shooter into a Martyr makes this BLM movement look more and more like the Palestinian terrorists in Israel. Kill a bunch of innocents and become a Martyr and get fame/notoriety for it.
SemperMortis wrote: 1: She is a relatively influential person because of the Miss Alabama thing, She is using that bit of fame and notoriety to push a terrible opinion forward into the public eye.
Influential relative to who? I don't know about you, but when I think of influential people "former minor local celebrity" is hardly at the top of my list. In fact, I'm fairly certain I never would have known what the opinion of a former Miss Alabama was, or even had the slightest interest in finding out, until you posted here about it.
2: The fact that anyone would believe such a narrative and turn the Dallas Shooter into a Martyr makes this BLM movement look more and more like the Palestinian terrorists in Israel. Kill a bunch of innocents and become a Martyr and get fame/notoriety for it.
No, it really doesn't. What it does is demonstrate that if you look hard enough you can find someone stating pretty much any opinion. And it also demonstrates how the right-wing outrage machine takes the results of the search and turns an obscure person hardly anyone is listening to into a major event. It says nothing about BLM as a whole because, again, this is just some random person stating their opinion.
No, it really doesn't. What it does is demonstrate that if you look hard enough you can find someone stating pretty much any opinion.
I wonder how hard I would have to look to find the opinions of people who might think that bringing back lynchings would remind BLM what their proper place in society is.
No, it really doesn't. What it does is demonstrate that if you look hard enough you can find someone stating pretty much any opinion.
I wonder how hard I would have to look to find the opinions of people who might think that bringing back lynchings would remind BLM what their proper place in society is.
Not hard.
After the Charleston church shootings last year, my uncle (a retired federal government worker) said the only thing wrong about what Dylann Roof did was that he did it in a church. Or you could ask the guys I work with that say black people are "13% of the population but 98% of the problem" and think that the police should just open fire on BLM protesters because when the Philly police dropped bombs on the MOVE rowhouse in 1985, it "reminded them of what their place is" and you didn't hear about them anymore.
No, it really doesn't. What it does is demonstrate that if you look hard enough you can find someone stating pretty much any opinion.
I wonder how hard I would have to look to find the opinions of people who might think that bringing back lynchings would remind BLM what their proper place in society is.
I pulled these off The Trump Party's facebook group this afternoon:
I assume all those same people are now looking at Nice and asking what sort of monster would drive a truck through a crowd of people.
Also - Peregrine! Somewhere you are making Stacey Dash very nervous, tugging at the underpinning of her "celebrity".
No, it really doesn't. What it does is demonstrate that if you look hard enough you can find someone stating pretty much any opinion.
I wonder how hard I would have to look to find the opinions of people who might think that bringing back lynchings would remind BLM what their proper place in society is.
I pulled these off The Trump Party's facebook group this afternoon:
I assume all those same people are now looking at Nice and asking what sort of monster would drive a truck through a crowd of people.
Also - Peregrine! Somewhere you are making Stacey Dash very nervous, tugging at the underpinning of her "celebrity".
Jihadin wrote: We all knew it was coming. With all the negativity (justified/unjustified) of LEO's
So every time a police officer is shot, it's connected to racial tensions?
Anyways, here's what Dreadclaw's article says on the matter:
That store was the site of an officer-involved shooting that left a black man dead in the early morning hours of July 5. Police said they have yet to establish a motive that connects the shootings to recent protests or the death of Alton Sterling.
There's nothing in the article (or that I've seen yet) identifying the gunmen as anything beyond "wearing black camouflage clothing".
The article also says that he began "shooting indiscriminately" before the Police arrived on scene, where they then engaged in a firefight. Nothing in that indicates to me that the shooter was deliberately targeting Police, he just attacked them when they arrived to arrest him.
Jihadin wrote: We all knew it was coming. With all the negativity (justified/unjustified) of LEO's
So every time a police officer is shot, it's connected to racial tensions?
Anyways, here's what Dreadclaw's article says on the matter:
That store was the site of an officer-involved shooting that left a black man dead in the early morning hours of July 5. Police said they have yet to establish a motive that connects the shootings to recent protests or the death of Alton Sterling.
There's nothing in the article (or that I've seen yet) identifying the gunmen as anything beyond "wearing black camouflage clothing".
Gavin Eugene Long. A black man from Missouri. Lured police to the location, then specifically targeted them. Reported by MSNBC, NBC, and CBS.
Jihadin wrote: We all knew it was coming. With all the negativity (justified/unjustified) of LEO's
So every time a police officer is shot, it's connected to racial tensions?
Anyways, here's what Dreadclaw's article says on the matter:
That store was the site of an officer-involved shooting that left a black man dead in the early morning hours of July 5. Police said they have yet to establish a motive that connects the shootings to recent protests or the death of Alton Sterling.
There's nothing in the article (or that I've seen yet) identifying the gunmen as anything beyond "wearing black camouflage clothing".
Gavin Eugene Long. A black man from Missouri. Lured police to the location, then specifically targeted them. Reported by MSNBC, NBC, and CBS.
Jihadin wrote: We all knew it was coming. With all the negativity (justified/unjustified) of LEO's
So every time a police officer is shot, it's connected to racial tensions?
A strawman argument? Seriously?
Here's a quote from CBS News.
Last week, police arrested and identified three young people who they say plotted to kill Baton Rouge cops using guns stolen from a pawn shop. Law enforcement said at a conference they believe it to be a substantial and credible threat on police officers in the Baton Rouge area.
I'd say racial tensions shoulder considerable responsibility here.
So the shooter is more closely related to the Arizona Ranchers and 'County Supremacists' than #BLM. You know, the groups which pointed multiple rifles at police officers and federal agents heads, and the police/feds took it all in stride and did nothing about it...
So the shooter is more closely related to the Arizona Ranchers and 'County Supremacists' than #BLM. You know, the groups which pointed multiple rifles at police officers and federal agents heads, and the police/feds took it all in stride and did nothing about it...
Looking at the info in that link, I see a guy who is anti-gov't and has a lot of racial motivations. The two are not mutually exclusive, and he seems to have seen race as a motivating factor, as he saw anti-govt as a motivating factor.
An official said the belief is that Long identified as being associated with the black separatist movement in some capacity but there is no indication he was directed by it.
I think more of this would be a good thing, right now.
WICHITA, Kan. There was unity in Wichita Sunday night after a tense week for activists and law enforcement in the community, as well as nationwide.
Sunday night's event in Wichita's McAdams Park drew a crowd of nearly 1,000 people. The name of the gathering was the 'First Steps Cookout.'
Many people who spoke to Eyewitness News reporter Deedee Sun say the event was largely a positive step to bring the Wichita Police Department closer to the community it serves.
A large crowd gathered in McAdams Park enjoyed free food and the opportunity to have one-on-one conversations with law enforcement.
"Very good vibe. Very good vibe. It's everything I was hoping for," says Wichita Police Chief Gordon Ramsay.
The barbecue took place instead of a planned protest for Sunday night.
Ramsay suggested the event to community leaders following a Black Lives Matter protest in the city last week.
Ramsay had said the barbecue was an opportunity for citizens and police to be introduced and to have positive interaction. Nearly 400 people pledged their intention to attend the event with an RSVP. More than double that amount attended.
Leading up to the barbecue, there was a lot of positive support in response to the event on social media. People at the barbecue said it is the right way to respond to the unrest going on across the country.
The Wichita Police Department brought the burgers and grilled up and served food. Many others also brought food, contributing what they could to the barbecue.
The turnout at the barbecue was especially encouraging for some following the events that unfolded earlier in the day in Baton Rouge with three officers fatally shot by a gunman.
"Especially after what happened in Baton Rouge today, just makes it all the more painful. But I just feel very proud of my city that there's so many people here," says Margaret at the 'First Steps Cookout.' "It's wonderful."
Civilians and officers say the barbecue was a concrete step toward bridging the gap between people and police.
Part of the event included a Question and Answer session with Ramsay. Some in attendance did take this opportunity to voice frustrations.
One man says he viewed the cookout as an attempt to take attention away from real cause of the tension between some citizens and police.
Ramsay says his department is committed to making things better.
"This isn't something we're going to change overnight or tonight," he says. "It's just going to take continual effort on everybody's part. And work on policy changes, relationships. And that's what's going to get to the heart of the issues."
They are some weird militia like group that seems to specialize in
1. inappropriately showing up in camo and bad guns;
2. seem to specialize in low level tax fraud.
Frazzled wrote: They are some weird militia like group that seems to specialize in
1. inappropriately showing up in camo and bad guns;
2. seem to specialize in low level tax fraud.
And often there is a 3rd level of white supremacy and anti-antisemitism which hangs around them. Almost always they say 'this is about the federal guvernment' and then a closed-door rally gets recorded and it is all anti minority hate speech.
Frazzled wrote: They are some weird militia like group that seems to specialize in
1. inappropriately showing up in camo and bad guns;
2. seem to specialize in low level tax fraud.
So if these sovereign citizens believe that they are above many of the laws, and thus out of reach of the police, doesn't that fit with what we know about Gavin Eugene Long/Cosmo?
Frazzled wrote: They are some weird militia like group that seems to specialize in
1. inappropriately showing up in camo and bad guns;
2. seem to specialize in low level tax fraud.
So if these sovereign citizens believe that they are above many of the laws, and thus out of reach of the police, doesn't that fit with what we know about Gavin Eugene Long/Cosmo?
Frazzled wrote: They are some weird militia like group that seems to specialize in 1. inappropriately showing up in camo and bad guns; 2. seem to specialize in low level tax fraud.
So if these sovereign citizens believe that they are above many of the laws, and thus out of reach of the police, doesn't that fit with what we know about Gavin Eugene Long/Cosmo?
Another military Veteran... Maybe there is an issue with vets not getting appropriate treatment???
For what? He was not wounded (from what we know), he was a comms guy (data networks), not a door kicker. The last one was a reservist who got sent home from theater (and kicked out of the service) for sexual harassment.
Pretty hard to pin this on the PTSD addled psycho killer vet myth.
Long received several awards, including the Marine Corps Good Conduct Medal, Iraq Campaign Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, National Defence Service Medal and Navy Unit Commendation Medal.
None of those are indicative of having been in active combat or even having been blown up by an IED while on a convoy. Between his MOS, awards and his tour dates (while we were winding down), I don't see anything that would show 'veteran mistreated or not helped' as the excuse.
nkelsch wrote: Another military Veteran... Maybe there is an issue with vets not getting appropriate treatment???
Making the assumption that he suffered from a service related impairment. I have not seen it reported that he was. Do you have a source that does?
The article states;
"assumed an extremist persona online and became increasingly outspoken after the controversial shooting death of Alton Sterling, according to state and federal law enforcement officials."
It also appears that his declaring himself a sovereign citizen also tied him to a black separatist group;
http://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/news/baton_rouge_officer_shooting/article_aa22ff5e-4cf5-11e6-80c3-4fcddb044245.html "Long filed a “live claim birth” and “name correction” in Jackson County in which he identified himself as an indigenous member of the United Washitaw de Dugdahmoundyah Mu’ur Nation, the documents show. . . The Southern Poverty Law Center has said the Washitaw Nation is comprised of black separatists claiming to be descended from pre-Columbian inhabitants of North America. The group asserts that it is independent from the authority of local, state and federal laws."
So I'm still not seeing how the sovereign citizen angle "screws up the narrative."
nkelsch wrote: Another military Veteran... Maybe there is an issue with vets not getting appropriate treatment???
Making the assumption that he suffered from a service related impairment. I have not seen it reported that he was. Do you have a source that does?
Since we have a visibly increasing number of vets coming back from the middle east with 'issues' which go diagnosed or untreated due to both stigma as well as failing veterans care... and we have had multiple shootings from 'fine upstanding veterans' that seem to have trouble reintegrating with society when they return home and do crazypants things... makes me wonder if there is a larger issue going on?
I know a veteran who killed himself due to diagnosed PTSD because he was basically told to not bring it up. Now it seems like many of them fester... become extremists and kill people instead.
nkelsch wrote: Another military Veteran... Maybe there is an issue with vets not getting appropriate treatment???
Making the assumption that he suffered from a service related impairment. I have not seen it reported that he was. Do you have a source that does?
Since we have a visibly increasing number of vets coming back from the middle east with 'issues' which go diagnosed or untreated due to both stigma as well as failing veterans care... and we have had multiple shootings from 'fine upstanding veterans' that seem to have trouble reintegrating with society when they return home and do crazypants things... makes me wonder if there is a larger issue going on?
I know a veteran who killed himself due to diagnosed PTSD because he was basically told to not bring it up. Now it seems like many of them fester... become extremists and kill people instead.
By "many" you mean the two that happened this month? Given the hundreds of thousands of men and women who were deployed I think we need to see a lot more than two to consider it a trend or widespread problem.
nkelsch wrote: Another military Veteran... Maybe there is an issue with vets not getting appropriate treatment???
Making the assumption that he suffered from a service related impairment. I have not seen it reported that he was. Do you have a source that does?
Since we have a visibly increasing number of vets coming back from the middle east with 'issues' which go diagnosed or untreated due to both stigma as well as failing veterans care... and we have had multiple shootings from 'fine upstanding veterans' that seem to have trouble reintegrating with society when they return home and do crazypants things... makes me wonder if there is a larger issue going on?
I know a veteran who killed himself due to diagnosed PTSD because he was basically told to not bring it up. Now it seems like many of them fester... become extremists and kill people instead.
Your example of the veteran committing suicide is definitely a real problem that needs addressing. A male veteran is 1.5 times more likely to kill himself than a civilian man is.
The "PTSD mass shooter" narrative is not supported by facts, however. A veteran is no more or less likely to be a mass murderer than anyone else.
nkelsch wrote: Another military Veteran... Maybe there is an issue with vets not getting appropriate treatment???
Making the assumption that he suffered from a service related impairment. I have not seen it reported that he was. Do you have a source that does?
Since we have a visibly increasing number of vets coming back from the middle east with 'issues' which go diagnosed or untreated due to both stigma as well as failing veterans care... and we have had multiple shootings from 'fine upstanding veterans' that seem to have trouble reintegrating with society when they return home and do crazypants things... makes me wonder if there is a larger issue going on?
I know a veteran who killed himself due to diagnosed PTSD because he was basically told to not bring it up. Now it seems like many of them fester... become extremists and kill people instead.
The crap bag who shot cops in Dallas had nothing in his records to signify PTSD, though he did have info in his records to show he was a gak bag (sexual harassment that got him kicked out of the Army).
From what we know of Long's record, again, nothing to show he was exposed to anything to cause PTSD. He was not a combat arms trooper, he has no awards we know to show combat experience (as opposed to being deployed in a combat zone) and the 'when' of his deployment was a time when we were drawing down.
nkelsch wrote: Another military Veteran... Maybe there is an issue with vets not getting appropriate treatment???
Making the assumption that he suffered from a service related impairment. I have not seen it reported that he was. Do you have a source that does?
Since we have a visibly increasing number of vets coming back from the middle east with 'issues' which go diagnosed or untreated due to both stigma as well as failing veterans care... and we have had multiple shootings from 'fine upstanding veterans' that seem to have trouble reintegrating with society when they return home and do crazypants things... makes me wonder if there is a larger issue going on?
I know a veteran who killed himself due to diagnosed PTSD because he was basically told to not bring it up. Now it seems like many of them fester... become extremists and kill people instead.
Your example of the veteran committing suicide is definitely a real problem that needs addressing. A male veteran is 1.5 times more likely to kill himself than a civilian man is.
The "PTSD mass shooter" narrative is not supported by facts, however. A veteran is no more or less likely to be a mass murderer than anyone else.
Actually, the latest studies show vet suicides tend to happen in younger guys who do one term or less, and deployment to a combat zone is not really a factor (rates are very similar in guys who did not deploy). It appears it has more to do with screwed up folks who never should have been in the military coming into the military, and as a result there has been a focus on better screening.
So the PTSD means suicide is a myth just like the PTSD addled killer is a myth. Yes, vets are committing suicide. PTSD does not seem to be the primary reason at all.
nkelsch wrote: Another military Veteran... Maybe there is an issue with vets not getting appropriate treatment???
Making the assumption that he suffered from a service related impairment. I have not seen it reported that he was. Do you have a source that does?
Since we have a visibly increasing number of vets coming back from the middle east with 'issues' which go diagnosed or untreated due to both stigma as well as failing veterans care... and we have had multiple shootings from 'fine upstanding veterans' that seem to have trouble reintegrating with society when they return home and do crazypants things... makes me wonder if there is a larger issue going on?
I know a veteran who killed himself due to diagnosed PTSD because he was basically told to not bring it up. Now it seems like many of them fester... become extremists and kill people instead.
So do you or do you not have a source that shows this individual was suffering from PTSD, or are you prepared to say that you are making unsubstantiated assumptions?
d-usa wrote: Clearly there is something that is caused by being a military veteran that causes all this, or it wouldn't be military veterans doing it.
There have been a few other shootings of cops/attempted shootings of cops over the last couple of weeks, hasn't there?
Not all done by vets. Race, specifically blacks agains police, does seem to be a motive where we have info that allows us some insight into motive (we don't in all cases).
And there are millions of veterans form the last decade+ of war, so these two shootings does not seem to be indicative that 'there is something that is caused by being a military veteran that causes all this'.
d-usa wrote: Clearly there is something that is caused by being a military veteran that causes all this, or it wouldn't be military veterans doing it.
There have been a few other shootings of cops/attempted shootings of cops over the last couple of weeks, hasn't there?
Not all done by vets. Race, specifically blacks agains police, does seem to be a motive where we have info that allows us some insight into motive (we don't in all cases).
And there are millions of veterans form the last decade+ of war, so these two shootings does not seem to be indicative that 'there is something that is caused by being a military veteran that causes all this'.
Don't we have as much correlation around vets as we do race?
Baton Rouge- Black Guy and vet
Dallas- Black Guy and Vet
What other police shootings are you referring to beyond run-of-the-mill law enforcement related violence?
So do you or do you not have a source that shows this individual was suffering from PTSD, or are you prepared to say that you are making unsubstantiated assumptions?
Considering the last 4 veteran shootings had PTSD/Mental Illness and it was untreated due to 'reasons'. (Fort hood 2014, Fort hood 2009, Navy Yard, Houston)
And then there are other PTSD shootings like the Chris Kyle shooting.
So we see another veteran perpetuating a shooting... begs the question... Considering we *ARE* neglecting our VETs health care and how we take care of them after being deployed, and there is Stigma over treatment for PTSD... It isn't an issue which should be ignored out of blind admiration of Veterans who are seen infallible heroes.
d-usa wrote: Clearly there is something that is caused by being a military veteran that causes all this, or it wouldn't be military veterans doing it.
There have been a few other shootings of cops/attempted shootings of cops over the last couple of weeks, hasn't there?
Not all done by vets. Race, specifically blacks agains police, does seem to be a motive where we have info that allows us some insight into motive (we don't in all cases).
And there are millions of veterans form the last decade+ of war, so these two shootings does not seem to be indicative that 'there is something that is caused by being a military veteran that causes all this'.
Don't we have as much correlation around vets as we do race?
Baton Rouge- Black Guy and vet
Dallas- Black Guy and Vet
What other police shootings are you referring to beyond run-of-the-mill law enforcement related violence?
No, we don't have as much correlation because in both cases you mention the perps themselves claimed the act was do to 'blacks against police' and had social media and other evidence backing up their claims.
Other recent incidents (not all shootings, at least one is a molotov cocktail) and as I stated earlier, not all have enough info to guess at motive):
And a cop in Valdosta, GA was shot, and a cop in Roswell, GA was shot at. Other cops been shot at/shot but generally while stopping/attempting to stop a crime. Most of the above as far as I can tell look like cops were targeted for being cops.
So do you or do you not have a source that shows this individual was suffering from PTSD, or are you prepared to say that you are making unsubstantiated assumptions?
Considering the last 4 veteran shootings had PTSD/Mental Illness and it was untreated due to 'reasons'. (Fort hood 2014, Fort hood 2009, Navy Yard, Houston)
And then there are other PTSD shootings like the Chris Kyle shooting.
So we see another veteran perpetuating a shooting... begs the question... Considering we *ARE* neglecting our VETs health care and how we take care of them after being deployed, and there is Stigma over treatment for PTSD... It isn't an issue which should be ignored out of blind admiration of Veterans who are seen infallible heroes.
Are you seriously using Maj Hassan at Ft Hood as a PTSD case? That fether never even deployed.
Alexis (Naval yard shooter) never deployed, and was a crappy trooper (in trouble multiple times). Yeah, sick, not PTSD at all.
Dionisio Garza (Houston shooter) was never diagnosed with PTSD (though his dad wants to believe he suffered from it).
And Lopez (2014 Ft Hood shooter) may have suffered from PTSD, but being pissed at not being allowed to take leave is what lead to the shooting, not PTSD.
Individuals with PTSD have an elevated prevalence of risk factors that are associated with increased violence, such as substance misuse and comorbid psychiatric disorders. Because of this, findings regarding the relationship between PTSD and violence should be interpreted cautiously if they are based on analyses that do not take risk factors other than PTSD into account. For example, in one study of Veterans who served post-9/11, PTSD when examined on its own was associated with an increased risk of violence. However, when alcohol misuse was statistically controlled, PTSD was no longer associated with an increased risk of violence (3). The prevalence of violence in PTSD is comparable to the prevalence in anxiety and depressive disorders, which ranges from 5.0% to 11.7% (2,5). The prevalence of violence is higher among individuals with alcohol or substance misuse (range = 9.1% to 34.7%) (2,6,7). Furthermore, the more diagnoses someone has, the greater the likelihood of violence.
The data showing that the prevalence of violence among individuals with PTSD is 7.5% in the US population and 19.5% in post-9/11 Veterans suggest that the association between PTSD and violence is especially strong in this Veteran cohort. However, to understand these findings, it is important to consider that post-9/11 Veterans are relatively young (median age = 34) and that younger age is associated with increased risk of violence (2-4). For example, in the National Comorbidity Survey of the US general population, the prevalence of violence in the past year was 32.7% among men between the ages of 25-34 but only 1.3% among men aged 35-44 (2). Findings like these suggest that age and perhaps other demographic characteristics need to be considered when comparing the post-9/11 cohort with non-Veterans or with Veterans of other eras.
BaronIveagh wrote: I think it's just a case of better training and some thought and preparation being put into it.
The sort of things the military does give everyone, in theory, deployed or not.
I'm actually surprised at the restraint shown so far. I keep waiting for them to burn/bomb/mortar a police station.
The Dallas shooter got his training outside of the military (his MOS was a vertical construction engineer, but after he got booted from the army he attended tactical shooter training).
So do you or do you not have a source that shows this individual was suffering from PTSD, or are you prepared to say that you are making unsubstantiated assumptions?
Considering the last 4 veteran shootings had PTSD/Mental Illness and it was untreated due to 'reasons'. (Fort hood 2014, Fort hood 2009, Navy Yard, Houston)
And then there are other PTSD shootings like the Chris Kyle shooting.
So we see another veteran perpetuating a shooting... begs the question... Considering we *ARE* neglecting our VETs health care and how we take care of them after being deployed, and there is Stigma over treatment for PTSD... It isn't an issue which should be ignored out of blind admiration of Veterans who are seen infallible heroes.
d-usa wrote: Clearly there is something that is caused by being a military veteran that causes all this, or it wouldn't be military veterans doing it.
Clearly there is something that is caused by being black that causes all this, or it wouldn't be black people doing it.
Which of course also works for "Muslim", "people who own guns", "homosexuals", and any other random demographic fact that gets thrown around as the "cause" every time something happens.
d-usa wrote: Clearly there is something that is caused by being a military veteran that causes all this, or it wouldn't be military veterans doing it.
Clearly there is something that is caused by being black that causes all this, or it wouldn't be black people doing it.
Which of course also works for "Muslim", "people who own guns", "homosexuals", and any other random demographic fact that gets thrown around as the "cause" every time something happens.
Then I would say that your an ignorant left winger who doesn't believe in facts but likes to skew them as much as possible. Did the Orlando Shooter say he was carrying out his attack in the name of ISIS? pretty sure he did
How about the San Bernadino shooters? ISIS right?
How about the Fort Hood shooter? In the name of allah right? yup.
These are all confirmed facts, not random links put together in a chain. By your own logic you are wrong. Please withdraw your comment it is highly offensive.
Semper, you aren't behaving any different. This thread is getting rude, everyone reel it in and start approaching the topic with more control or we'll have to lock it. Remember, when we make points online be careful not to use sarcasm or things like that, it is very easy to mistake for something that is rude as opposed to trying to make a point through something that would work far better in person.
d-usa wrote: Clearly there is something that is caused by being a military veteran that causes all this, or it wouldn't be military veterans doing it.
Clearly there is something that is caused by being black that causes all this, or it wouldn't be black people doing it.
Which of course also works for "Muslim", "people who own guns", "homosexuals", and any other random demographic fact that gets thrown around as the "cause" every time something happens.
Then I would say that your an ignorant left winger who doesn't believe in facts but likes to skew them as much as possible. Did the Orlando Shooter say he was carrying out his attack in the name of ISIS? pretty sure he did
How about the San Bernadino shooters? ISIS right?
How about the Fort Hood shooter? In the name of allah right? yup.
These are all confirmed facts, not random links put together in a chain. By your own logic you are wrong. Please withdraw your comment it is highly offensive.
What does the shooters pledging allegiance to ISIS have to do with d-usa's point?
SemperMortis wrote: Anyone covered the fact that Former Miss Alabama called the gunman a Martyr? or that a Psychist tried to justify that by making a comparison to a elementary school bully getting punched in the face. (Cops are the bully, the person punching the bully is the dallas sniper)
I didn't miss it, I just didn't care to get into it. However, since we have some people getting unfriendly in the past few posts, I'll use your comment to remind everyone that BLM is not about MLK style activism. They've got some outliers but the core of it is still the same as it was last year. Let's go to Blair White who sums it up better (controversial so use headphones if at work).
Spoiler:
As long as there are people who refuse to call BLM on their they will continue to incite and foment.
The Dallas shooter got his training outside of the military (his MOS was a vertical construction engineer, but after he got booted from the army he attended tactical shooter training).
Granted, but my point still stands that compared to someone with no military training whatsoever, his odds of success were greater, and this holds regarding the other shootings by ex-military personnel as well. We're seeing a more efficient, better planned killing than, say, the average gang banger might come up with, which in turn is causing greater impact.
As long as there are people who refuse to call BLM on their they will continue to incite and foment.
That video is terrible and she is dumb calling BLM anti-LGBT when it is Pride who is anti-Black as there is a huge history of bigotry within the LGBT community where white gay males do not support or associate with the LBT and segregate themselves from minorities. One of the major reasons they crashed the Toronto event was because there was an overwhelming lack of diversity and many minority groups were given less space or worse space or less representation than the white-male gay groups. And the leader of Toronto Pride admitted they were valid points and agreed to them. Many disagree with the whole 'police' aspect of their requests but in general it was a valid protest with a valid point to make within the LGBT community and even the local Pride people acknowledge it.
She is pretty wrong on that, and pretty wrong on a lot of things... so terrible video is terrible.
nkelsch wrote: ... she is dumb calling BLM anti-LGBT when it is Pride who is anti-Black...
Accusations of LGBT being anti-black does not excuse or erase anti-LGBT actions of BLM. Unless you're of the opinion that two wrongs do in fact make a right?
nkelsch wrote: She is pretty wrong on that, and pretty wrong on a lot of things... so terrible video is terrible.
Well, you only brought up the one BLM vs LGBT issue so what other things are you calling her out for? Did BLM not chant "dead cops" and "fry 'em like bacon" after all? Do you believe MLK would be a supporter of Black Lives Matter and their anti-cop rhetoric and tactics of blocking freeways and previous rioting? Blair suggests that BLM has strained race relations since their founding. Do you have any evidence to the contrary? Or do you just not like Blair because... reasons?
they will continue to incite and foment.