Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Arx]

Since it seems to have got lost:

serious question: those who support the hellfires/storming/assault/manbearcats/etc., do you propose that threatening to resist arrest with violent force should become a crime punishable by execution without trial? Because as far as I can tell, that's what you're suggesting.

[Baffler]

@Baffler:
Yeah, it's rather easy to be angry when you see a BLATANT double-standard at work. It's amazing that some people are like "Why u mad that a group of armed crazy crackers aren't being shot in the same week that the cops got off for shooting a black kid with a water gun? Why are you so angry, black people?"

Who said I gave a fuck about any of that? The double standard I see is a bunch of people openly calling for the authorities to just light these guys up instead of giving them proper treatment for their crimes. Then in the same breath, complaining about cops shooting black people while still implying the same should be done here, and wondering what I'm so salty about.

Since it seems to have got lost:

serious question: those who support the hellfires/storming/assault/manbearcats/etc., do you propose that threatening to resist arrest with violent force should become a crime punishable by execution without trial? Because as far as I can tell, that's what you're suggesting.

Arx puts it better.

[mainiac]

For the record, I am making no judgement of anyone.  Let it be recorded.

[RedKing]

@Baffler:
Yeah, it's rather easy to be angry when you see a BLATANT double-standard at work. It's amazing that some people are like "Why u mad that a group of armed crazy crackers aren't being shot in the same week that the cops got off for shooting a black kid with a water gun? Why are you so angry, black people?"

Who said I gave a fuck about any of that? The double standard I see is a bunch of people openly calling for the authorities to just light these guys up instead of giving them proper treatment for their crimes. Then in the same breath, complaining about cops shooting black people while still implying the same should be done here, and wondering what I'm so salty about.

Since it seems to have got lost:

serious question: those who support the hellfires/storming/assault/manbearcats/etc., do you propose that threatening to resist arrest with violent force should become a crime punishable by execution without trial? Because as far as I can tell, that's what you're suggesting.

Arx puts it better.

Get back to me when black people are occupying Federal property and threatening to shoot anyone trying to stop them. Different crimes, different consequences. Or are you telling me that petty theft (or in some cases, NO CRIME AT ALL) is a bigger threat than armed rebellion and incitement to violence?

If a group of New Black Panthers pulled this shit and invoked Moorish Law (another "sovereign citizen" bullshit concept), I'd support the same response that I'm advocating for the Bundy militia. Though I wouldn't have to, because they'd have already been smoked within 24 hours of the takeover.

[nenjin]

Since it seems to have got lost:

serious question: those who support the hellfires/storming/assault/manbearcats/etc., do you propose that threatening to resist arrest with violent force should become a crime punishable by execution without trial? Because as far as I can tell, that's what you're suggesting.

People have been shot for far, far, far less. Consider all the people that have been killed lately who didn't even get the chance to threaten violence before they were lit the fuck up.

What gets me is that this has been going on DAYS already. There are no cops on the scene. The FBI said it's "handling it."

Does that not strike you as a double standard, whether you're advocating removing them by force or not? People have died at the hands of police in a matter of minutes for far less damning actions.

So where is the justice, hrm? Where is the refusal to be intimidated by armed criminals? Where's the "Not in my fucking town"? Where's the "only good guys with guns stop bad guys with guns?" Why is it the police suddenly have so much self-control? They've exploded on to even more controlled scenes and people have left dead. Why is this suddenly different?

I don't want anyone to be shot. But I want the police to remove those fuckers and if someone pulls a gun maybe, just maybe, a bullet will go where it rightfully belongs for once in this country.

But no. Now we need "peace and patience" and they'll negotiate with these fucks for as long as it takes so they don't have another Waco on their hands. Because killing white people making a political statement must be avoided at all costs.

I want these guys to be treated like everyone else in America who picks up a gun and starts scaring the fuck out of everyone. Oh but lo and behold, suddenly that's not appropriate here, for some unknowable, unquantifiable reason.

Maybe this is the new model for policing in America. When someone does something illegal, the police just stand back for fear of making the situation any worse than it already is. I can think of at least 6 innocent people who'd still be alive today if everyone got the same protection and consideration as a bunch of white redneck ranchers, who are styling themselves as a militia, who don't even understand what they're angry about and who don't even have the support of the people they say they're there to represent.

[Rolan7]

@Baffler:
Yeah, it's rather easy to be angry when you see a BLATANT double-standard at work. It's amazing that some people are like "Why u mad that a group of armed crazy crackers aren't being shot in the same week that the cops got off for shooting a black kid with a water gun? Why are you so angry, black people?"

Who said I gave a fuck about any of that? The double standard I see is a bunch of people openly calling for the authorities to just light these guys up instead of giving them proper treatment for their crimes. Then in the same breath, complaining about cops shooting black people while still implying the same should be done here, and wondering what I'm so salty about.

It's completely different.  These people have armed and organized themselves, and have outright threatened to open fire in "self defense" if the government tries to arrest or disperse them.  Their demands are ludicrously vague, which makes me think they want a confrontation.  Probably martyrdom.  Which is the *only* reason not to stop these terrorists with overwhelming force:  It's what they want.

Keep in mind that I think the "police brutality" issue is completely overblown.  In all but a few of the high-profile cases the suspects were non-compliant or even belligerent.  "Unarmed" doesn't mean shit in close quarters, those officers were in real danger and the suspects had every chance to comply.  Usually.

But there's a huge difference between getting stopped by a "pig" and resisting, and getting a bunch of fellow zealots together with rifles to occupy a government building.  Making explicit, pre-meditated threats.

Since it seems to have got lost:

serious question: those who support the hellfires/storming/assault/manbearcats/etc., do you propose that threatening to resist arrest with violent force should become a crime punishable by execution without trial? Because as far as I can tell, that's what you're suggesting.

Arx puts it better.

It's not a "crime punishable by execution", it's an attempted arrest.  They can surrender at almost any time and survive.  If they choose to use lethal force instead, they might get shot.  A decision has to be made, factoring in the lives of the suspects, the police, and any noncombatants in the area.  (Noncombatants essentially being hostages, even if they're willing, which makes use of force more dangerous.)

Plus they have to consider that, if they do use the appropriate amount of force, the terrorists may win anyway by becoming martyrs.  Holding themselves hostage, in effect.  It's not fair but it's life.

[Helgoland]

It sounds like you guys would rather have the police act consistently than have the police act properly. Or, putting it the other way around: Since people you care about are being treated unjustly, you feel those nutcases shouldn't be treated right either.

At least that's the vibe I'm getting off of you guys.

[Sheb]

Yeah, me too.

[nenjin]

In lieu of ever getting the police to act properly, yes, I want them to act consistently. I'd rather have no one getting justice rather than only some people; that'll foment social change and changes in policing faster than this double-standard bullshit where no matter which way you slice it, the white militia gets what it wants. Kill them? They're martyrs. Don't do anything? You've legitimized their special place in American politics where they can break the law, flagrantly, and they don't get treated the same.

The only option is for the police to march in there and do their jobs. If the militia shoots, they're clearly in the wrong. If they don't, they get put in cuffs like they deserve and we all get to congratulate the police on both doing their job professional and not making distinctions between what kinds of criminals they have to deal with.

[RedKing]

I don't know that it's "fear of making it worse" as much as "fear of 150 gun nuts". The local sheriff's department is definitely not staffed or equipped to respond to something like that. According to their website, they have a sheriff and five deputies. The county has a population of 7700. This is Andy Griffith/Barney Fife territory (not that I'm casting any aspersions on their competence).

@Sheb/Helgo: Well, that would at least be a start. Justice needs to be fair first, and merciful second. Plus, I don't like the implications of allowing armed paramilitaries to escape consequences.

[Willfor]

We would like the police to start BEING consistent, and actually pick an option that they will apply to everyone equally instead of hiding behind hate. We are angry at the police.

[MaximumZero]

They could always call in para-military types and blame them when things inevitably go horribly wrong.

[Rolan7]

It sounds like you guys would rather have the police act consistently than have the police act properly. Or, putting it the other way around: Since people you care about are being treated unjustly, you feel those nutcases shouldn't be treated right either.

At least that's the vibe I'm getting off of you guys.

Pointing out a double standard is different from suggesting that the police should kill'em all.  I assume most people in this thread would prefer that the police show more restraint when trying to arrest criminals...  Like the restraint they're showing here, with an armed militia.

I don't agree, but they're not saying what you're saying they're saying, know what I'm saying?

[RedKing]

Meh, to read the militia discussions, they've already decided that anyone from the militias who opens fire first is actually a secret government agent provacateur. Must be nice to absolve yourself of guilt pre-emptively before the shit hits the fan.

[MaximumZero]

This is the problem with wackos: they're always right, no matter how hard they have to spin things into fantasy-land to be right.