Huge college entrance scandal
Quote: gamerfreakSchrödinger’s Liberal.
Simultaneously unemployed living off handouts and bribing Universities for millions of dollars.
The people with no money have all the money.
Quote: RSNow a little bit of bribery is illegal? What has this world come to???
What's really funny is; the people that are all upset with rich people buying their kids way in are ok with dunces getting in under affirmative action. You really can't make this stuff up.
Quote:Just over 3 percent of the Forbes 400, United for a Fair Economy found, have left no good paper trail on their economic backgrounds. Of the over 60 percent remaining, all grew up in substantial privilege.
Those “born on first base” — in upper-class families, with inheritances up to $1 million — make up 22 percent of the 400. On “second base,” from households wealthy enough to generate inheritances over $1 million, UFE found another 11.5 percent.
Yup everybody gets there through hard work and no advantages.
https://ips-dc.org/the_self-made_hallucination_of_americas_rich/
Quote: MaxPenWhat's really funny is; the people that are all upset with rich people buying their kids way in are ok with dunces getting in under affirmative action. You really can't make this stuff up.
I would call rich people paying bribes to get their kids in schools they dont qualify for the very definition of dunces getting in under affirmative action
I. JUST. DON’T. CARE.
There are some funny memes out there about Aunt Becky getting busted though... so that’s a plus.
Quote: EvenBobNobody, thats why he's on some
network everyday. because nobody
cares what he says.
Ever watch the movie Network
This is classic
Simply because he is on TV, that's all you need as an excuse to listen to his drivel
I could care less if Dershowitz is on TV, its still drivel he is spewing
Its classis Trump thinking. If he is on TV , he must be smart
Its really dumb and stupid to rate intelligence by the number of TV appearances somebody has
Quote: darkozI would call rich people paying bribes to get their kids in schools they dont qualify for the very definition of dunces getting in under affirmative action
Those rich people are the ones who support affirmative action. They are just the typical rules for everybody but me type. Because they are special....lol
You support their group think.
Quote: TigerWuI'm in college right now, they will definitely still kick you out for bad grades.
They give out a lot less bad grades then they used to though. Average is a B in a lot of places nowadays as far as I can tell.
Pretty pathetic story though.
In another pathetic story involving rich people, my alma mater Mizzou had their brand new sports arena named Paige Sports Arena thanks to Bill Laurie's $25 million donation toward the arena. Was going to be named that for at least four years iirc until his daughter Paige got caught cheating at USC. Thank God. They have kept it at Mizzou Arena ever since.
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/news/story?id=1931214
Quote: ams288I wish I could muster up some strong opinions about this story but
I. JUST. DON’T. CARE.
There are some funny memes out there about Aunt Becky getting busted though... so that’s a plus.
I personally was shocked myself that Lori Laughlin who played Aunt Becky on Full House did this! O.O
Re-read some of your postsQuote: WatchMeWinI dont feel higher than anyone else.
It's called crapsQuote: WatchMeWinIve made very poor decisions in my life.
You created your own where now the casinos are actually leeching off you. Ya, Ya, I know, you think they will never catch up with you since you use a super duper fancy dancy hit and run system.Quote: WatchMeWinNever leached on the system.
and don't forget to stay hydrated.
Quote: MaxPenWhat's really funny is; the people that are all upset with rich people buying their kids way in are ok with dunces getting in under affirmative action. You really can't make this stuff up.
I'd rather have bribery than affirmative action for putting dunces in school.
At least bribery puts money back in the economy.
And I'd much rather have some rich d-bag pay $40 million for a stadium to get his idiot kids into college than have that $40 million come out of my tax dollars.
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/felicity-huffman-arrested-by-fbi-agents-with-guns-drawn-in-early-morning-report?fbclid=IwAR2mXx2Ph9rAdkzAu63zO6Djz7xRrLvEpI4ls_zc_zsEVfHqI1UI40FBqnM
This is not as silly as the Stone arrest with boats and all (and a news team!), but it seems a bit ridiculous that they were notified of their impending arrests and not simply told "report between 7-9 a.m. on 3/12 to be processed or risk a knock on your door and being taken into custody by force." You already TOLD them you were coming so you gave them info to get ready to do something stupid if that thought was in their head. If you are telling someone they are about to be arrested (as opposed to them knowing they were a suspect and not the fact that arrest was imminent), why waste the time and manpower...not to mention the always present danger of adding drawn weapons to the mix...serving the warrant?
It isn't that I am against having guns drawn when serving an arrest warrant; I just see no need in either the Stone case (except for TV) or these cases to add extra risks to anyone, including the officers/agents involved.
Quote: RonC"A source told the Los Angeles Times that Huffman and other defendants had recently received notice that they might face arrest. Sources familiar with Huffman’s arrest told the paper that FBI agents with guns drawn showed up at the actress’ home at 6 a.m. to take her into custody."
https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/felicity-huffman-arrested-by-fbi-agents-with-guns-drawn-in-early-morning-report?fbclid=IwAR2mXx2Ph9rAdkzAu63zO6Djz7xRrLvEpI4ls_zc_zsEVfHqI1UI40FBqnM
This is not as silly as the Stone arrest with boats and all (and a news team!), but it seems a bit ridiculous that they were notified of their impending arrests and not simply told "report between 7-9 a.m. on 3/12 to be processed or risk a knock on your door and being taken into custody by force." You already TOLD them you were coming so you gave them info to get ready to do something stupid if that thought was in their head. If you are telling someone they are about to be arrested (as opposed to them knowing they were a suspect and not the fact that arrest was imminent), why waste the time and manpower...not to mention the always present danger of adding drawn weapons to the mix...serving the warrant?
It isn't that I am against having guns drawn when serving an arrest warrant; I just see no need in either the Stone case (except for TV) or these cases to add extra risks to anyone, including the officers/agents involved.
I think, "received notice that they might face arrest" is not the same as "We're coming tomorrow morning to arrest you".
Quote: AyecarumbaI think, "received notice that they might face arrest" is not the same as "We're coming tomorrow morning to arrest you".
It doesn't matter as far as I am concerned. Parsing words. They were going to be arrested; they would not have been notified of that if there had not been a nearly 100% chance that it was going to happen.
The point is why waste the time and manpower and not just have them report? You can't even use the "publicity" thing like they did in the perp walks for Wall Street where they wanted to get it in the news. These people were being arrested, no matter how the came to be in custody, and sending 13 teams of gun-wielding agents for this type of crime is a waste of time and money. OUR money. If one of the accused was considered dangerous, then you have to handle that in a different way.
Stone was not dangerous. These defendants may well be guilty, but they are physically pretty harmless.
You can still publish mug shots and say that have been arrested...
Quote: RonCQuote: AyecarumbaI think, "received notice that they might face arrest" is not the same as "We're coming tomorrow morning to arrest you".
It doesn't matter as far as I am concerned. Parsing words. They were going to be arrested; they would not have been notified of that if there had not been a nearly 100% chance that it was going to happen.
The point is why waste the time and manpower and not just have them report? You can't even use the "publicity" thing like they did in the perp walks for Wall Street where they wanted to get it in the news. These people were being arrested, no matter how the came to be in custody, and sending 13 teams of gun-wielding agents for this type of crime is a waste of time and money. OUR money. If one of the accused was considered dangerous, then you have to handle that in a different way.
Stone was not dangerous. These defendants may well be guilty, but they are physically pretty harmless.
You can still publish mug shots and say that have been arrested...
There's a big difference between "might" and "We are coming to arrrest you". I get notices of "might" or "may" face prosecution every time I play a DVD, or watch an MLB baseball game on TV. That is very different than "Officers will be at your door tomorrow morning to take you into custody". Which you have rightly pointed out would put law enforcement in jeopardy.
It is clear that the arrests were done purposefully to embarrass folks and generate publicity. I also agree with you that it is a waste of tax payer dollars too, and that these parents, whose real crime is what... wanting the best for their kids?... will not face any significant jail time and will end up doing community service. In the meantime, a USC student was murdered a few blocks from the campus on Sunday night. Maybe the resources spent running down rich folks who made large "donations" in order to get their kids on campus would be better spent keeping the kids already there from dying at the hands of gun wielding criminals?
They're rich, they could afford to just leave the country at the drop of a hat and never come back.
Quote: TigerWuMaybe they thought they were flight risks for some reason.
They're rich, they could afford to just leave the country at the drop of a hat and never come back.
If they thought that, then they should not have been notified that they may face arrest. I am pretty sure lawyers and all were already involved; it isn't like they solved the crime yesterday and no one involved knew anything about it.
I am against the improper use of force--you use the force necessary without risking the lives of officers. "Guns drawn" would seem to be pretty normal when arriving at a home with an unknown response from the folks inside. I just don't think you need to go that far in a case like this. We let people surrender all the time--Aunt Becky was out of the country and it does not seem like she was arrested on arrival back in the US; it sounds like she turned herself in as planned.
This seems, as Stone did, more like someone feeling like some weird show of force is necessary for whatever reason. Showing force is sometimes called for but the less time officers have to draw their weapons, the better.
I am not excusing the crimes, if they did them (and a lot of evidence is in the public record on that issue); just the use of 13 teams to arrest some white collar folks at gunpoint.
Quote: petroglyphLuckily the cops didn't accidentally discharge their firearms and kill anybody [and the family dog] ala SWAT.
Exactly. If you don't go in like they did when you don't need to do so, less of those kind of things happen.
Pulling a weapon (even without pointing it) on somebody is always a tense situation for all involved. Unless you've been on one end or the other of it, it is easy to trivialize. Once you have been on one side or the other, it is a little different. I've been on both sides. Neither was any fun.
Quote: AxelWolfRe-read some of your posts It's called craps You created your own where now the casinos are actually leeching off you. Ya, Ya, I know, you think they will never catch up with you since you use a super duper fancy dancy hit and run system.
and don't forget to stay hydrated.
I guess insecure people could interpret it that way.
Not a system and not super duper fancy.... just disciplined, knowledgeable, and experienced.
Bye, have a gray tie tonight! Drink lots of fluids......
There are so many horror stories of them showing up to the wrong house and killing someone who had zero involvement with the case
And the dog dies 100% of the time
Militarization of police is not good.
And this story is already 5 years old! http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/10-facts-about-the-swatification-of-america-that-everyone-should-know?utm_source=feedly&utm_reader=feedly&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=10-facts-about-the-swatification-of-america-that-everyone-should-knowQuote: gamerfreakSWAT teams are used far too often
There are so many horror stories of them showing up to the wrong house and killing someone who had zero involvement with the case
And the dog dies 100% of the time
Militarization of police is not good.
Quote: gamerfreak
There are so many horror stories of them showing up to the wrong house and killing someone who had zero involvement with the case
That's because for every brave cop,
there are 10 chickenshits. They need
an army of cops around them to
feel safe.
Quote: AyecarumbaQuote: RonCQuote: AyecarumbaI think, "received notice that they might face arrest" is not the same as "We're coming tomorrow morning to arrest you".
It doesn't matter as far as I am concerned. Parsing words. They were going to be arrested; they would not have been notified of that if there had not been a nearly 100% chance that it was going to happen.
The point is why waste the time and manpower and not just have them report? You can't even use the "publicity" thing like they did in the perp walks for Wall Street where they wanted to get it in the news. These people were being arrested, no matter how the came to be in custody, and sending 13 teams of gun-wielding agents for this type of crime is a waste of time and money. OUR money. If one of the accused was considered dangerous, then you have to handle that in a different way.
Stone was not dangerous. These defendants may well be guilty, but they are physically pretty harmless.
You can still publish mug shots and say that have been arrested...
There's a big difference between "might" and "We are coming to arrrest you". I get notices of "might" or "may" face prosecution every time I play a DVD, or watch an MLB baseball game on TV. That is very different than "Officers will be at your door tomorrow morning to take you into custody". Which you have rightly pointed out would put law enforcement in jeopardy.
It is clear that the arrests were done purposefully to embarrass folks and generate publicity. I also agree with you that it is a waste of tax payer dollars too, and that these parents, whose real crime is what... wanting the best for their kids?... will not face any significant jail time and will end up doing community service. In the meantime, a USC student was murdered a few blocks from the campus on Sunday night. Maybe the resources spent running down rich folks who made large "donations" in order to get their kids on campus would be better spent keeping the kids already there from dying at the hands of gun wielding criminals?
They committed tax fraud by participating in a scheme involving a phony charity and because the applications were sent via US Mail, its a conspiracy to commit mail fraud. These are Federal crimes and Federal prosecutions rarely end in a wrist slap. People who steal with pens are more insidious to society than those who rob at gunpoint. The former often pretend to be community leaders while the latter let it be known they are criminals.
Quote: billryanQuote: AyecarumbaQuote: RonCQuote: AyecarumbaI think, "received notice that they might face arrest" is not the same as "We're coming tomorrow morning to arrest you".
It doesn't matter as far as I am concerned. Parsing words. They were going to be arrested; they would not have been notified of that if there had not been a nearly 100% chance that it was going to happen.
The point is why waste the time and manpower and not just have them report? You can't even use the "publicity" thing like they did in the perp walks for Wall Street where they wanted to get it in the news. These people were being arrested, no matter how the came to be in custody, and sending 13 teams of gun-wielding agents for this type of crime is a waste of time and money. OUR money. If one of the accused was considered dangerous, then you have to handle that in a different way.
Stone was not dangerous. These defendants may well be guilty, but they are physically pretty harmless.
You can still publish mug shots and say that have been arrested...
There's a big difference between "might" and "We are coming to arrrest you". I get notices of "might" or "may" face prosecution every time I play a DVD, or watch an MLB baseball game on TV. That is very different than "Officers will be at your door tomorrow morning to take you into custody". Which you have rightly pointed out would put law enforcement in jeopardy.
It is clear that the arrests were done purposefully to embarrass folks and generate publicity. I also agree with you that it is a waste of tax payer dollars too, and that these parents, whose real crime is what... wanting the best for their kids?... will not face any significant jail time and will end up doing community service. In the meantime, a USC student was murdered a few blocks from the campus on Sunday night. Maybe the resources spent running down rich folks who made large "donations" in order to get their kids on campus would be better spent keeping the kids already there from dying at the hands of gun wielding criminals?
They committed tax fraud by participating in a scheme involving a phony charity and because the applications were sent via US Mail, its a conspiracy to commit mail fraud. These are Federal crimes and Federal prosecutions rarely end in a wrist slap. People who steal with pens are more insidious to society than those who rob at gunpoint. The former often pretend to be community leaders while the latter let it be known they are criminals.
Do you honestly believe that "Aunt Becky" will do time in a federal prison?
Quote: EvenBobThat's because for every brave cop,
there are 10 chickenshits. They need
an army of cops around them to
feel safe.
Doing it with a no knock warrant is even worse.
I can’t believe no knock warrants are legal.
And to think most of them are done over drugs. What a waste: just another sickening symptom of the failure of the war on drugs.
And...because of an amount that is flushable.Quote: gamerfreakDoing it with a no knock warrant is even worse.
I can’t believe no knock warrants are legal.
And to think most of them are done over drugs....
Quote: gamerfreakI can’t believe no knock warrants are legal.
And to think most of them are done over drugs.
Good idea. Knock first, so the drug dealers inside have time to arm themselves to teeth.
Quote: TankoGood idea. Knock first, so the drug dealers inside have time to arm themselves to teeth.
That’s part of being in law enforcement.
It’s innocent until proven guilty.
You are a 2A advocate, correct? What are you going to do if your door is busted down out of nowhere? Not a good situation for anyone involved. Especially the dog.
Quote: Ayecarumba
Do you honestly believe that "Aunt Becky" will do time in a federal prison?
I believe it's possible the worst thing some of these people thought would happen is their kid gets expelled and they have to find a new school.
Well almost, because a lot of money was shelled out.
Quote: gamerfreakThat’s part of being in law enforcement.
It’s innocent until proven guilty.
You are a 2A advocate, correct? What are you going to do if your door is busted down out of nowhere? Not a good situation for anyone involved.
I see. Knock first so the drug dealers have time to arm themselves. Then shoot it out. Got it.
Maybe in Bizarro world.
When the police have reasonable cause to believe weapons are present, a judge can grant a no knock warrant.
They are not automatic.
If they’re innocent, they will have their day in court.
The objective is to avoid unnecessary injury or death. These people are heavily armed and often have pit bulls with their larynx slashed to keep them from barking.
They don’t want the police to know there are dogs inside. They train the dogs to attack the crotch. While the police are busy fighting off the dogs, they hope to pull their own guns and kill the police. The police conduct these raids with two officers carrying shotguns and wearing thick rubber aprons to keep the dogs from biting their crotch. Once inside they quickly press the mutts against the wall with the shotgun barrels and blow them to bits. They’re the first to go.
Not a job for pussies.
You'd think if they'd surveiled the perp long enough to suspect them for a crime, they would have noticed them picking up sacks of dog food.Quote: TankoI see. Knock first so the drug dealers have time to arm themselves. Then shoot it out. Got it.
Maybe in Bizarro world.
When the police have reasonable cause to believe weapons are present, a judge can grant a no knock warrant.
They are not automatic.
If they’re innocent, they will have their day in court.
The objective is to avoid unnecessary injury or death. These people are heavily armed and often have pit bulls with their larynx slashed to keep them from barking.
They don’t want the police to know there are dogs inside. They train the dogs to attack the crotch. While the police are busy fighting off the dogs, they hope to pull their own guns and kill the police. The police conduct these raids with two officers carrying shotguns and wearing thick rubber aprons to keep the dogs from biting their crotch. Once inside they quickly press the mutts against the wall with the shotgun barrels and blow them to bits. They’re the first to go.
Not a job for pussies.
Don't you wonder why American police kill so many more people than their peers in other country's? https://www.vox.com/identities/2016/8/13/17938170/us-police-shootings-gun-violence-homicides
Why aren't cops subject to random drug tests?
Quote: TankoI see. Knock first so the drug dealers have time to arm themselves. Then shoot it out. Got it.
Maybe in Bizarro world.
When the police have reasonable cause to believe weapons are present, a judge can grant a no knock warrant.
They are not automatic.
If they’re innocent, they will have their day in court.
The objective is to avoid unnecessary injury or death. These people are heavily armed and often have pit bulls with their larynx slashed to keep them from barking.
They don’t want the police to know there are dogs inside. They train the dogs to attack the crotch. While the police are busy fighting off the dogs, they hope to pull their own guns and kill the police. The police conduct these raids with two officers carrying shotguns and wearing thick rubber aprons to keep the dogs from biting their crotch. Once inside they quickly press the mutts against the wall with the shotgun barrels and blow them to bits. They’re the first to go.
Not a job for pussies.
And I thought conservatives were all about small government too? These are all bad excuses for a F’d up military police state. If you want big government (and the police are government), just come out and say so.
Maryland police raid Mayor’s house in error, kills 2 dogs:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/30/AR2008073003299.html
Georgia SWAT team throw gernade in Baby’s crib:
https://rollingout.com/2016/02/27/846658/
61 year old man shot to death as wife is handcuffed in other room in wrong house no knock raid:
https://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=95475&page=1
I could research and link 100 more of these disgusting stories about the police state that America has become.
WAKE UP ...this is about is big and scary as government gets.
Not a single one of these incidents is worth 100,000 drug busts.
Quote: petroglyphYou'd think if they'd surveiled the perp long enough to suspect them for a crime, they would have noticed them picking up sacks of dog food.
They do. Hence the rubber aprons and shotguns.
Quote:Don't you wonder why American police kill so many more people than their peers in other country's? https://www.vox.com/identities/2016/8/13/17938170/us-police-shootings-gun-violence-homicides
No, I don't.
We have 300,000,000 million guns and a large population of criminals willing to use them.
144 officers were killed in the line of duty last year. Their peers don't encounter the number of armed criminals that American law enforcement does.
Quote:Why aren't cops subject to random drug tests?
They are.
Quote: Tankodouble
With good police work, perps could be caught at the store getting dog food.Quote: TankoThey do. Hence the rubber aprons and shotguns.
So we have a feed back loop.Quote:We have 300,000,000 million guns and a large population of criminals willing to use them.
It would be silly for anyone to put their gun down first. But it sucks and double sucks when cops get the wrong address and always kill the family pet, with impunity.Quote:144 officers were killed in the line of duty last year. Their peers don't encounter the number of armed criminals that American law enforcement does.
They sure didn't used to, and I'd have to see it now to believe it.Quote:They are.
Innocent until proven guilty is a rule of evidence. It’s not anything more than that and has nothing to do with warrants, nor is it good advice to give your kids in the real world (unless they are serving jury duty).Quote: gamerfreakThat’s part of being in law enforcement.
It’s innocent until proven guilty.
You are a 2A advocate, correct? What are you going to do if your door is busted down out of nowhere? Not a good situation for anyone involved. Especially the dog.
Man, that was well said.Quote: unJonInnocent until proven guilty is a rule of evidence. It’s not anything more than that and has nothing to do with warrants, nor is it good advice to give your kids in the real world (unless they are serving jury duty).
Quote: unJonInnocent until proven guilty is a rule of evidence. It’s not anything more than that and has nothing to do with warrants, nor is it good advice to give your kids in the real world (unless they are serving jury duty).
It’s the backbone of our entire criminal justice system (or should be), but let’s ignore it for a second and bring the burden of the legal system down to probable cause, which is what is actually required to get a warrant.
You realize that the police regularly manufacture probable cause and judges will eat it up and sign whatever warrant comes over their desk?
What probable cause do the police have to bust down the door on the completely wrong house and kill anything inside that moves?
This is just more garbage excuses for big government military state police.
https://sports.yahoo.com/dogs-quit-on-iditarod-leader-when-musher-yells-at-one-of-his-animals-024330136.html
Don’t follow this post at all. I agree you’ve correctly stated the standard to get a warrant. But then you go off about corruption. Sure. Corruption everywhere. What’s the takeaway?Quote: gamerfreakIt’s the backbone of our entire criminal justice system (or should be), but let’s ignore it for a second and bring the burden of the legal system down to probable cause, which is what is actually required to get a warrant.
You realize that the police regularly manufacture probable cause and judges will eat it up and sign whatever warrant comes over their desk?
What probable cause do the police have to bust down the door on the completely wrong house and kill anything inside that moves?
This is just more garbage excuses for big government military state police.
They take away all kind of stuff. Remember Treetopbuddy?Quote: unJonDon’t follow this post at all. I agree you’ve correctly stated the standard to get a warrant. But then you go off about corruption. Sure. Corruption everywhere. What’s the takeaway?
Unless the suspect is believed to be dangerous, cops shouldn't be entering with weapons drawn. I've got a feeling that drawn weapons can make people act unpredictable in many cases and turn some situations into dangerous ones unnecessarily.
Quote: MintyUnless the suspect is believed to be dangerous, cops shouldn't be entering with weapons drawn.
Unless of course, they are the FBI, raiding the home of a 66 year old man with no criminal history or record of gun ownership.
Then you can send a dozen agents, armed with assault rifles, flash grenades and side arms, while CNN by coincidence, has their cameras set up on a lawn across the street.
Quote: MintyThere are so many issues here. Too many guns in the hands of criminals. Too many areas with militarized police. Too much bias between judges and cops so they aren't held properly accountable for their actions.
Unless the suspect is believed to be dangerous, cops shouldn't be entering with weapons drawn. I've got a feeling that drawn weapons can make people act unpredictable in many cases and turn some situations into dangerous ones unnecessarily.
The thing about no-knock warrants is they have gotten out of hand. You never heard about them before the 1980s. Then the crack epidemic happened. You had crack houses getting set up in residential areas, making a menace of themselves and the neighborhoods unlivable. If the cops knocked then the crack would be flushed and no evidence there.
It made for getting the houses cleared out. Even the ones that stayed had to be way more subdued about what was going on inside. It made for even better TV. News shows along with "Cops" showed them going down. This made the public feel safer, that something was being done.
The usual slippery slope happened. No-knocks became more normal. Now we have militarized police who love the rush from kicking in doors in a raid. I heard of one place where a guy was on trial for killing a cop coming in his window on a raid when he was just sitting at home. In this case I would vote "not guilty" as that particular raid was very excessive.
Even if we legalize all drugs tomorrow, the cultural thing is there. Do you want to live next to a shooting gallery? Junkies will stay junkies under legal drugs. Same as tosspots in bad neighborhoods drink legal booze on the streets.
Militarized police will sadly remain, and because they have the equipment they will use it. Not going to change in our lifetimes. Best defense is an armed society as if cops are worried about the general population firing back.
I don't know if an all armed society would work. I just don't want every north town thug running around all willy-nilly with a gun. They have the upper hand in many situations since they have no problem blasting away and killing people in order to take what they want. I have to think about all the kids, females and passive men who wouldn't be capable and comfortable when it comes to pulling the trigger. If you take certain people out of the equation then I would be all for more guns and less gun control, if you took those people out of the equation then there would be no reason for gun protection.Quote: AZDuffmanThe thing about no-knock warrants is they have gotten out of hand. You never heard about them before the 1980s. Then the crack epidemic happened. You had crack houses getting set up in residential areas, making a menace of themselves and the neighborhoods unlivable. If the cops knocked then the crack would be flushed and no evidence there.
It made for getting the houses cleared out. Even the ones that stayed had to be way more subdued about what was going on inside. It made for even better TV. News shows along with "Cops" showed them going down. This made the public feel safer, that something was being done.
The usual slippery slope happened. No-knocks became more normal. Now we have militarized police who love the rush from kicking in doors in a raid. I heard of one place where a guy was on trial for killing a cop coming in his window on a raid when he was just sitting at home. In this case I would vote "not guilty" as that particular raid was very excessive.
Even if we legalize all drugs tomorrow, the cultural thing is there. Do you want to live next to a shooting gallery? Junkies will stay junkies under legal drugs. Same as tosspots in bad neighborhoods drink legal booze on the streets.
Militarized police will sadly remain, and because they have the equipment they will use it. Not going to change in our lifetimes. Best defense is an armed society as if cops are worried about the general population firing back.
Quote: AxelWolfI don't know if an all armed society would work. I just don't want every north town thug running around all willy-nilly with a gun. They have the upper hand in many situations since they have no problem blasting away and killing people in order to take what they want. I have to think about all the kids, females and passive men who wouldn't be capable and comfortable when it comes to pulling the trigger. If you take certain people out of the equation then I would be all for more guns and less gun control, if you took those people out of the equation then there would be no reason for gun protection.
Here's the thing. The thugs you worry about already have the guns they want and even if there were magically no guns they would still be thugs. They would be worse thugs because even a thug is afraid of getting shot if they mess with the wrong person.
Are you old enough to remember the Bernie Goetz case? At that time, NYC was owned by thugs, people were afraid to ride the subway. The thugs that threatened him did not have one gun among them. Most of the nation was on his side.
Same will eventually happen with the militarized police. A raid on either the wrong house by an honest error or just a marginal situation for a no-knock. Maybe a no-knock for CYS? Who knows. Anyways, when said raid happens, someone will be armed and blow away one or a few of the cops. It will make the media. The nation will ask, "what has happened here?"
