Bedford Ramblings
Steve Mills

Another tragedy for us to morn, and contemplate.

Posted Friday, July 8, 2016, at 9:41 AM
View 88 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • It's sad that as a nation we haven't advanced beyond hate and rascist views.We give law breakers noteriety and a silent encouragement.On the other hand we have those who feel they are above the law.This time a bomb attached to a robot was used to take out the shooter.I only feel that it'll play into paranoia and cause further incidents.I understand the need for bombs in war's against our enemies but against our own citizens. Where do we draw the line? How do we stop the violence?I believe that the time for a serious conversation about the current mess we are in needs to happen right now.

    -- Posted by beau maverick on Fri, Jul 8, 2016, at 11:14 AM
  • Really? Is that what they meant about explosives in the hallway where the shooter was? Personally, I don't object to stopping the person killing others.

    Stopping the violence is an admirable objective and one I totally agree. BUT, as you say "how", and who should be in the conversation?

    I would love to be, but I realize just how minuscule I am so who should discuss it? I don't put much value on politicians but they put value on what WE think. On polls.

    How about religious leaders? And I am not saying just Christian leaders, ALL. Except for those who encourage violence and hate, which would exclude some of the so-called Christian groups as well. But them too if they could contribute reasonable ideas.

    Who else is a leader that could get into the conversation?

    Educators? They certainly have a lot to do with the youth.

    Sports leaders? They have a lot of sway with their fans.

    Hollywood? I believe there is a lot more common sense in that community than we see or are led to believe.


    -- Posted by stevemills on Fri, Jul 8, 2016, at 11:44 AM
  • This will not turn around until people stop feeling like they are above the law and this includes policemen.Treat people the way you want to be treated.This should wake up americans who refuse to believe we have a race problem in America.More people will go buy more guns instead of loving their neighbors no matter what color or religion.This was a peaceful march and the police were marching with them.This is a sad day for America.

    -- Posted by lets be real on Fri, Jul 8, 2016, at 12:04 PM
  • *

    Things are all fun and games until someone gets an eye poked out. Of course it was a peaceful demonstration. Until it wasn't. And there were no cops marching with the protesters. I know the A Few Black Lives Matter crowd were chanting their bogus, incendiary mantra "hands up, don't shoot".

    I wonder if they were also chanting 'pigs in a blanket..." or "what do we want...when do we want it"? If people would just do what they are told when in custody instead of trying to resist, there would be fewer people of all colors getting killed by cops. Even if one or both of the cops from earlier this week get found guilty of a crime after investigation and due process, that gives no one the right to kill them or any other cop.

    As an aside, since not all cops that shoot people are white, their feeling of being above the law can't be explained by white privilege. I wonder if it can be explained by clinton privilege?

    -- Posted by fair share on Fri, Jul 8, 2016, at 12:48 PM
  • Agreed that it is a sad day for America and the human race in general but not sure that we can legislate human nature.

    As intelligent beings we have the ability to override and control our urges but even our politicians cannot do it, so I suspect that this will be with us until mind control and genetic engineering turns us into robots. (hopefully never)

    Until then, we have to find ways to cope with it, and encourage our intelligence to control it, but with public examples we see daily doing just the opposite .....

    For the same reason, we will also continue to have some individuals of a race hate another race, ethnicity hate another or religion vs religion. They need someone to blame for their problems, someone to take out their frustrations.

    I doubt seriously that this is an American phenomena. We just are a free enough society that it all gets put on the clothesline.

    -- Posted by stevemills on Fri, Jul 8, 2016, at 12:55 PM
  • Fair share it is people like you who keep their head in the sand and ignor racial problems in America.I guess you were there and know more than the cop on news that stated it was peaceful and some were with the marchers.If you did not feel anything when you saw the video of that man shot 5 or 6 times while pinned down and shot at close range then you are heartless. There is no reason for a cop to pull guns at a routine traffic stop.I do not care if the man was white and the cops were black it would still be wrong. This march had nothing to do with black lives matter,it was organized by all pastors of color and all people of color and religion.Those cops that killed the 2 men this week will not be found guilty,that is what is causing the problem.Killers of innocent people should have to pay no matter who they are.

    -- Posted by lets be real on Fri, Jul 8, 2016, at 1:58 PM
  • Attention everyone,the blame is shared by all Americans.We as a nation have enabled many tragedies to happen and to feed fuel to the fire.In all the arguments and excuses,I never hear the words accountability and responsibility.I do feel that cops need to demilitarize,learn some people skills,stop the aggressiveness and be held accountable.On the other hand the public needs to stop acting out,obey law enforcement when asked to, understand if you point a gun at a cop you may get shot,stop making excuses for bad behavior,and stop the sense of entitlement.Men of religion need to step up and become beacons outside the church.All of us have the ability and.power to help end the tradgedies.Rascism needs to become a federal crime that applies to everyone.Yes you cannot legislate morality or human nature but laws can be used against offenders.One solution is not to listen to those from Chicago or other bad crime ridden areas.Why is it more people get shot and killed in Chicago verses our soldiers in combat areas?For the question on whose to be involved in the question of violence?I say it's a conversation for all Americans.No matter who you are or where you come from.

    -- Posted by beau maverick on Fri, Jul 8, 2016, at 2:22 PM
  • *

    Lbr?, I saw both videos of the guys getting shot this past week. Both made me sad. I get sad anytime someone dies. I don't believe I ever said there is no racism. Even if I did have my head in the sand I would still see evidence of it regularly. I did say it was peaceful, until it wasn't by which I meant no one got hurt until people started getting killed solely because they happened to be white cops. Hard to believe, I know, but racism works both ways. Another little known fact: women can be sexist. Maybe the BLM higher-ups didn't organize it but there were plenty of people hollering the idiotic "hands up, don't shoot" mantra and the domestic terrorist that ended up dead was talking to the cops about BLM. Cops pulling guns at routine traffic stops? I doubt many cops would say anything they do is routine. But when a guy tells them he has a gun and starts reaching for something, surely not routine. Like I said. If everyone would be calm, not make sudden moves, and not resist, there would be far fewer people shot by cops.

    -- Posted by fair share on Fri, Jul 8, 2016, at 3:53 PM
  • "This will not turn around until people stop feeling like they are above the law and this includes policemen. "


    Does it include former secretaries of state?

    -- Posted by quietmike on Fri, Jul 8, 2016, at 6:14 PM
  • Now Mike, you shouldn't be so hard on Condoleezza Rice.

    -- Posted by Rocket Valentine on Fri, Jul 8, 2016, at 6:50 PM
  • *

    RV, it is offensive for you to say "hard on" and "Condoleezza Rice " in the same sentence . At least I think some might make that argument.

    -- Posted by fair share on Fri, Jul 8, 2016, at 7:05 PM
  • Don't go getting all politically correct on me now

    -- Posted by Rocket Valentine on Fri, Jul 8, 2016, at 7:19 PM
  • *

    Feels like we have fallen into the alternate universe, huh?

    -- Posted by fair share on Fri, Jul 8, 2016, at 7:58 PM
  • I think we will struggle with this as long as we continue to look for simple answers, and somewhere to fix blame. The real world is not full of simple answers, and sometimes there is not anyone to "blame."

    A lot of what we are, is programmed into us by our human nature, and by the culture in which we grow up. The fact is, police are more likely to shoot blacks than whites. This includes black officers. Studies show this to be true, and statistics bear it out. Those psychologists are pretty clever, and can administer tests that , while not seeming to directly address this question, are revealing of subconscious, underlying behaviors.... They have also developed training, that in a similarly indirect manner, alters the behavior of police officers, reducing that probability... One would think that every police department would embrace this training, but I think that would be perceived as an admission that there is something wrong.

    The whole situation is complicated by the way we process information. The media, mainstream or otherwise, inundates us with the exceptions, and we see so much of it, that we perceive the exception as the rule. The truth is, the vast majority of black males are not criminals. The vast majority of police officers are not going to shoot a black man for no reason. The happenings in Dallas is not our society falling apart, nor is it police under siege. Dallas was about one mentally unstable individual with an AR15....just like the Colorado theatre shooting, or Sandy Hook, or any of the other mass shootings.

    This issue is not going to be improved by the search for fault, and looking for a simple solution. If we want to create a better America, we need to view this as a problem in which everyone needs to come together and look for solutions... not, perhaps, instant or perfect solutions, but a process where we defuse the situation. Everyone needs to look for the part they can play in moving in the right direction.

    Police Departments need to say; "hey. while the actual incidence is not as high as it would seem from watching TV, we are too likely to have a bad shooting in encounters with black men. We need to look into training that will help us perform better in our jobs." I cannot help but believe that every one of us, if we were a black male, and saw this seemingly endless stream of videos of shootings, would be petrified if we were pulled over by the police. It is hard to remember that, even when it happens twice in a week, those shootings only represent a miniscule percentage of encounters between the police and black civilians. Unfortunately, that perception of a police encounter as a potentially deadly situation does not tend to engender the type of behavior that lessens the probability. The shootings would decrease in number, if there were fewer antagonistic responses during encounters with the Police. We can sit here all day, and say that the Police should not respond to anger with anger; that they should not be provoked by feeling that their authority is being challenged; but they are human, too.

    What we really have going on here, is a failure of our leadership. If the Democrats are sympathetic to BLM, then the Republicans feel that they must oppose it. If the "liberals" are seen as portraying the Police as cold blooded killers, then the "conservatives" are bound to portray BLM as cop killers. We need leaders on both sides, who say that we have a common problem, and need to work together to seek a solution. We do not have those leaders. What passes for leadership today, are people who read the biases of their constituency, and pander to the worst aspects of our human nature.

    You know what would make me feel like we were moving in the right direction? I would like to see Fare Share post that; "You know, BLM has legitimate concerns. I don't think that marches and demonstrations are a productive way to address those concerns, and it puts a group that is really seeking a nonviolent approach at the mercy of riff raff and troublemakers who can so easily meld in with a crowd.... I am going to encourage my political leadership to meet with the leadership of BLM and look for productive ways to address this." And then to have Les B Reel respond with; "You know; I don't believe that the Police want to see this killing continue. And the seemingly unjust acquittals or failure to bring charges in cases that look cut and dried from the outside, are not a cover-up. They are really a product of a legal system where it is difficult to convict a Police Officer in cases like this. Probably, it is better that it works that way, because Police work forces the officers to be in more deadly situations than the average citizen.... I would like to see my political leadership at those same meetings, with a goal of working with all parties involved."

    -- Posted by lazarus on Sat, Jul 9, 2016, at 9:31 AM
  • Actually most studies show cops are more hesitant to shoot a black man vs. a white man


    IMO, too many people were raised to believe there are no such thing as consequences.

    Then they step out into the real world and reality hits them.... Hard.... Sometimes fatally.

    Others who were also raised poorly are quick to decry racism or other nonsense.

    Mike Brown was a perfect example. A lifelong thug who robbed a convenience store, and attacked a cop was shot and killed. Nevermind the facts in the case, the media portrayed him as a "gentle giant" and instead of going with current "thugged up" pictures that were available, they chose older innocent looking pictures to maximize the emotional effect.

    Same with Trayvon Martin. NBC actually dubbed the 911 tape to make Zimmerman sound racist to inflame opinions.

    Ask yourself why people are so sure its bloodthirsty, racist cops right after an incident, yet when it goes to trial where ALL the evidence comes out, the cops are found not guilty, if there's even enough evidence for an indictment.

    -- Posted by quietmike on Sat, Jul 9, 2016, at 10:05 AM
  • The Washington Times? You don't even need to read the Washington Times to know what it is going to say. *ONE* simulator study is not *MOST* studies. One of the other articles I saw on there was "Rush Limbaugh labels BLM a 'terrorist group.'"

    Polarization. Enough said.

    -- Posted by lazarus on Sat, Jul 9, 2016, at 11:12 AM
  • Maybe if Black lives matter change to Black Lives Matter Also then idiots could see they mean in addition to and not excluding others.Some seem to not have a problem with the violent KKK all these years but want to label BLM and NAACP,that are nonviolent groups as terrorist.I applaud all the whites,hispanics,and other races now coming out to support BLM.They realize that silence= consent. Police are taught to deescalate.I see quitemike is one of those that think stealing cigars deserves death.I am not saying what Brown did was right.Tell me what Trayvon Martins crime was, other than being confronted in the dark by someone with a gun.I would have fought him too.Dylan Roof was took to Burger King by police when captured after killing 9 people,Eric Garner was choked to death for selling cigarettes.Enough said.

    -- Posted by lets be real on Sat, Jul 9, 2016, at 12:13 PM
  • I also applaud NYPD for refusing to let Trump address the police department.He and others like Limbaugh are only adding fuel to the fire.

    -- Posted by lets be real on Sat, Jul 9, 2016, at 12:16 PM
  • To see quietmike still defend George Zimmerman shows the disconnect and division between conservatives and liberals.

    To conservatives, Zimmerman is a hero. After his acquittal, he made the rounds on the Fox News shows. Republicans on social media defended him. He just sold the gun at an online auction for over $100,000.

    They see him as the victim. Just a guy defending himself from some thug.

    On the other side, liberals see Zimmerman as a monster. A disturbed, wanna-be cop. A guy that stalked a kid walking home from the store, and then forced an altercation with him that resulted in Zimmerman killing him.

    The fact that two different groups of people can see the same event in two totally different ways, is a good example of the division we face in our country right now.

    -- Posted by Rocket Valentine on Sat, Jul 9, 2016, at 12:46 PM
  • *

    Sorry to let you down lazyrus, but I can only meet you part way. I don't deny that AFBLM has legitimate concerns. But in good conscience I can't say they are "really seeking a nonviolent approach". I still have it echoing in my ears: "pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon" and "what do we want/dead cops; when do we want it/now". Besides, since I am not registered with any political party I have no political leadership to go to.

    As far as BLM adding Also to their name--I may have been born at night, but it wasn't last night. Who was the Dem wanna-be nominee that got roasted within an inch of his life for having the audacity to respond to questioning "all lives matter", then immediately fell all over himself trying to take it back? If they really want to change their name to a more accurate one, as I have explained elsewhere, I would suggest "A Few Black Lives Matter". They don't care one bit about the daily murder of thousands of unborn black babies (not meaning to get off topic) and they never talk about all the black people being killed daily in the cities(like Chicago) and they sure don't give a rats behind about the black cops being killed. Don't even count the abortion issue tho. Shouldn't they at least think and say all black lives matter instead of only a very small percentage?

    All that being said laz, I would be willing to say stuff in bad conscience and register with a party if it would help even a little. Any suggestions on which I should join?

    -- Posted by fair share on Sat, Jul 9, 2016, at 2:01 PM
  • *

    "I am not saying what Brown did was right."

    Which part wasn't right lestibereal? The stealing, or the charging at a cop and trying to take his gun. I would agree that one of them doesn't deserve being shot. Can you guess which one?

    -- Posted by fair share on Sat, Jul 9, 2016, at 2:58 PM
  • *

    Nothing is going to change for the good UNTIL Obama gets out of power as the U.S. President.

    If the brain Dead Demos vote Hillary in as his replacement, all this crap will continue for another 8 years.

    The King James Bible tells us that a man will come up out of the sea that will bring peace to the earth for 3 years. Then Christ will come and destroy all the evil. Sounds pretty simple to me!

    -- Posted by sui on Sat, Jul 9, 2016, at 3:53 PM
  • And let me guess Sui you think its nasty loud mouth I am so great Trump. Fair share if you think Brown attacked a police from several feet away with his hands up you are nuts.Thats what the witnesses said and the video showed and still no indictment.These 2 words are the main problem NO INDICTMENT.Fair share people like you always think blacks have more kids for free stuff,now they are having thousands of abortions,make up your mind.There are activists trying to decrease inner city violence,it just not televised.Zimmerman will get what is due him,the Bible states that if you live by the sword you will die by the sword.

    -- Posted by lets be real on Sat, Jul 9, 2016, at 5:03 PM
  • Lazarus, why don't you post some of those studies that show cops are more likely to shoot black men instead of just expecting us to take your word for it.

    Would an actual study work better for you?


    New information has come out that Castile wasn't stopped for a broken tail light, but because he fit the description of an armed robber that hit a store blocks away from where he was stopped.

    Also his girlfriend, who calmly posted a Facebook stream as her boyfriend lay dying beside her, posted another video a few days ago of her smoking a "blunt" in her car, while her child is in the back seat.


    I never claimed Zimmerman was a hero. I was pointing out the bias and "creative editing" of the news media to sell a narrative. A narrative too many believe on its face, without bothering to check sources for themselves.

    -- Posted by quietmike on Sat, Jul 9, 2016, at 5:42 PM
  • Statistics do not tell the true story. They tell the story of the one compiling or analyzing the statistics.

    I see a lot of posts on here referring to others as "idiots", "sticking their head in the sand", "brain dead, "racists", "haters", etc, etc. None of these type comments are helpful. Which, is one reason I have stopped reading and reduced posting on these blogs.

    What is evident to me is that there is a reason for pointing the accusatory finger of the media towards racism. Sure racism exists. Always has, and,, always will, as long as there are people. Suggesting that others deny it does, based on some perceived inferiority, is asinine. Dylan Roof was a white racist lunatic. Micah Johnson was a black racist lunatic. Both of these men killed numerous people based on the color of their skin. Yes, racism and racists exist in all colors/peoples.

    Just because racism exists does not mean that EVERY TIME a policeman shoots someone it is because of racism. However, the media constantly stokes the fire of racism in such cases by suggesting that is the cause, long before all the of facts are known. Why?

    There are actually twice is many whites shot by police as blacks, based on shear numbers, not per capita "statistics". However, the racism media narrative is not as productive when the victim is white. Why?

    Now, some will want to say that the statistics should match the numbers of the general population. Why should it? Are not some races more pre-disposed to weakness in certain areas and more pre-disposed to strength in other areas? Of course they/we are, that is what makes us all unique.

    We have to get beyond our own prejudices to find real solutions. Racism and hatred exists. Do you want more of it? No? Then stop perpetuating it.

    -- Posted by Liveforlight on Sat, Jul 9, 2016, at 5:45 PM
  • Nice post liveforlight

    -- Posted by stevemills on Sat, Jul 9, 2016, at 7:02 PM
  • *

    L FL, you are absolutely right. Someone once said "there are lies, **** lies, and statistics. I have avoided statistics as much as possible over my lifetime because in the amount I absolutely had to take in school it was apparent you could design a study and pick which stats to use to prove whatever you want. And everyone is unique, just like everyone else.

    LBR?, you put me in the wrong pigeon hole. I like nuts-the kind you eat and some of the ones that need professional help -but I am neither. Brown did stick his upper body inside the cop car and tried to take the cop's gun. When he was shot he was charging the cop in a rage and not responding to orders to stop. In answer to my question, the answer is he didn't deserve to be shot for the stealing part.

    Of course I believe some (not all as you imply) black women have more kids just to get the free stuff. Who doesn't know that? But did you know more white women do it? I don't appreciate that either. And I don't accept your false choice of paying to kill their unborn or paying them to get it on like drunken sailors.

    Seriously LBR, I can tell from your handle on here that it is not meant as a general call for rational discourse. It seems to be a desperate cry for someone to help you get real. And hand to Bible, I'm here for you.

    -- Posted by fair share on Sat, Jul 9, 2016, at 7:22 PM
  • LEOs are a necessary evil and we should all be vigilant about watching them, recording them, and doing what we can to make them accountable.

    As is the case in EVERY line of work, not everyone has the right temperament for every job. Those who are too aggressive should be weeded out of law enforcement.

    Far, far too many LEOs are never disciplined or held accountable for their criminal mistreatment of citizens. This has to change or tragedies like what happened in Dallas will likely continue to occur.

    -- Posted by ClarkDV on Sat, Jul 9, 2016, at 9:51 PM
  • Steve, maybe we can get David Melson to repost his picture of John Tune and GJ Jordan squatting by the Dodge Pioneer they shot up when driven by a suspect who committed the high crime of shoplifting?

    The fact is, it used to be common practice for cops to shoot at criminals just for running away.

    Then the Supreme Court ruled in the Garner case in 1985 that cops could only shoot at fleeing suspects if they posed a high risk to the public if not immediately apprehended immediately.

    Or we could ask some of the older cops who carried saps and blackjacks (chunks of lead attached to springs and wrapped in leather) every day and would cave in your head if you fought with them.

    Cops are not more violent today.

    We have generations of children raised by children who were never taught respect and think there should never be consequences for their actions We see it in our schools and in our everyday lives.

    -- Posted by quietmike on Sun, Jul 10, 2016, at 2:38 AM
  • QM, do you know what year that was? It would be good to read the story behind a car shot by police. The archives go back to 2004 on the site.

    Asking here is about as good as I can do since I am not an employee of the paper, or calling the T-G.

    I've been in enough tight situations (never as a police officer) to not to second guess an officer's actions without DEEP knowledge of what was going on at the time.

    I'm not saying that there are not "loose guns" in law enforcement, (in general)but in every encounter I have and with law enforcement, they were polite, forceful but never pulled a gun.

    They had their hands on the weapons and from there I believe it was MY actions that escalated or diffused the situation.

    -- Posted by stevemills on Sun, Jul 10, 2016, at 9:08 AM
  • *

    Oh Steve, Steve, it sounds like you are (or were) a very bad boy. Now I have that stupid song from the Cops show playing in my head.

    -- Posted by fair share on Sun, Jul 10, 2016, at 10:45 AM
  • My serious issues were not with law enforcement. I lived a few other "lives" but it did not involve conflict with law enforcement.

    -- Posted by stevemills on Sun, Jul 10, 2016, at 11:11 AM
  • -- Posted by quietmike on Sun, Jul 10, 2016, at 11:38 AM
  • *

    Life is Life and THAT IS LIFE! Just have to get use to it. Things are going to happen, that's just LIFE and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

    Take Trump for example! No one really knows what is going to happen with this election. There are only a few million of us who have supported Trump and yet he keeps on winning regardless of all the polls.

    We don't know what is going to happen tomorrow or the next 5 minutes. We just have to live our life and die.

    Look back on your life and ask yourself what you did that will make a difference in this world?

    We are just here until they come to take us away. We live our lives to the best we can and it is just a drop in a bucket that will only evaporate in the long run.

    All the facts in the world will not change the way things will be.

    -- Posted by sui on Sun, Jul 10, 2016, at 8:57 PM
  • Because I'm a middle-aged white man, I will never know what it's like to walk this earth in black skin. I will never know how LEOs treat me as compared to a white man. I suspect, though, that I get the benefit of the doubt quicker than I would if I were not white.

    As for LEOs being as violent today as they were in years past, we have no real way of knowing that, just speculation. What we do know is that firearms are far, far more accurate and powerful today than in decades past, and hold more ammo.

    What we also know is that there are cameras everywhere now, and some of our LEOs are not looking very good in many of their interactions with our citizens. Take a look on YouTube, search it for PINAC or "first amendment audit". You will see how aggressive, belligerent, and unlawful many LEOs treat citizens filming in public when the citizen has done NOTHING illegal.

    Not all LEOs are bad, but a few bad LEOs are causing a LOT of pain and suffering, and even death, in our nation, and they needed to be removed from their jobs (not through violence, but rather through being fired).

    LEOs have guns, they have badges, and simply on their word alone you can be removed from your home or your car and placed into a cage. Your life can be ruined, sometimes for the simple act of standing up to a unlawful, bully officer. Or you can be killed and have the blue cloak of brotherhood back up a officer and rule their actions as justified.

    I, for one, am glad that my skin is white whenever I encounter a LEO. Because I know that my chances of surviving the encounter are better because of it.

    -- Posted by ClarkDV on Sun, Jul 10, 2016, at 9:07 PM
  • -- Posted by quietmike on Mon, Jul 11, 2016, at 2:43 PM
  • *

    I am white and I have told all my sons that when you are pulled over by a LEO, show him or her respect. Being a man or woman with a gun only needs a simple reason to shoot you, not that they will, but you never know.

    A county deputy in Florida picked up young women and raped them, then handcuffed them to trees in the woods on the beach. The Mosquitoes along I believe could kill a person. At least you would wish you were dead when you can't swat them. They finally caught him, but he never got the punishment he should have received for such an inhuman crime.

    There are killers from all walks of life and we don't know who they are and if we did, there is nothing we can do about it until...!

    I am white and I am not above the Law (Common Law that is). However I am above the "Color of Law", but no LEO is going to know that, so I do not resist arrest. I respect the LEOs that I deal with or that deal with me. They are just doing their job and we (including me) need them out there doing their jobs and stopping criminals).

    If I done some of the things that I have read about, I am sure I would be shot also. I love this old body I have too much to deliberately give any LEO any reason to shoot me.

    -- Posted by sui on Mon, Jul 11, 2016, at 6:53 PM
  • Well, so much for claiming "liberal gun-free zones" are where these mass shooters target.

    Texas has some of the most lax gun laws of any state. And when the Dallas shooting happened, there were many civilians there carrying their weapons.

    Dallas police and city officials said all this did was create major confusion for law enforcement, and made the already dangerous and deadly situation even worse.

    So the "more guns" theory, has been....shot down.

    -- Posted by Rocket Valentine on Mon, Jul 11, 2016, at 6:53 PM
  • *

    RV, you are putting your life in the hands of one shooting? Did you actually hear what they had to do to stop this man? They Blew him to pieces with a bomb. Even their guns were no match for this terrorist because he had a rifle and in a position where he could kill the LEOs before they could get close enough to shoot him.

    They were smart enough to send in the robot to blow him up. A Very Smart Move in my opinion. I believe we will be seeing a lot more of this kind of warfare. However, what about the misunderstood situations where bombing an unarmed man or woman will pose a big problem, or innocent bystanders get blown up too.

    There will always be what ifs or we should have!

    How many people were killed by the citizens who were armed? How many private citizens who were armed got shot? NONE! Your case is just plain stupid to even bring up. The people wanted to help, but they couldn't in this situation.

    Had one of the armed citizens been up there in the parking building somewhere........?

    -- Posted by sui on Mon, Jul 11, 2016, at 7:51 PM
  • Sui, you say that "your case is just plain stupid to even bring up".

    But I'm not the one who brought it up. I'm just quoting statements from the Dallas Mayor and Police Chief.

    They are the ones that said that having armed civilians running around with guns visible during an active shooting made their job that much harder.

    One quote was that "it sure took our eye off the ball for a moment", as they tried to figure out who the actual shooter was.

    So it's possible that police could have found the shooter faster and saved a few lives, if they weren't busy taking the civilians with guns into custody trying to figure out who was who.

    -- Posted by Rocket Valentine on Mon, Jul 11, 2016, at 9:46 PM
  • *

    Quietmike, I wonder how many people realize Dr Fryer is a black man? It would seem to me that would lend a lot of credibility to his study.

    -- Posted by fair share on Tue, Jul 12, 2016, at 1:04 AM
  • So one mass shooting in an area that's not a gun free zone, with a low number of victims, relatively speaking vs. scores of mass shootings in gun free zones with many, many more victims, and it's "settled"?

    Kinda scary when you actually see the inner workings of the liberal mind.

    -- Posted by quietmike on Tue, Jul 12, 2016, at 7:59 AM
  • Fair share, the perpetual victims will ignore that little tidbit, in all likelihood.

    Just like the Dallas chief, also a black man telling the protesters to get off the protest line and get an application from him and be part of the solution.

    But, we have a significant portion of the population who find a perverse sense of solace by claiming aggrieved status.

    -- Posted by quietmike on Tue, Jul 12, 2016, at 8:03 AM
  • *

    Well quietmike, in all fairness they are just following the president's lead. Personally, I would pay a whole lot more attention to what the Chief says than what the president says. And if people want to play the victim card they should at least have the decency to leave us out of it. I can't help but think if one of the open carry people was close by when the first shot rang out , there would have been a better outcome.

    -- Posted by fair share on Tue, Jul 12, 2016, at 8:25 AM
  • Well, according to the Mayor and Police Chief, the "more guns" theory didn't work.

    Evidently, a bunch of open/carry civilians frantically running around with weapons while police are trying to figure out who's shooting at them didn't work out so well.

    But somehow conservatives still think more guns is the answer.

    Kinda scary to see the workings of the conservative mind.

    -- Posted by Rocket Valentine on Tue, Jul 12, 2016, at 9:45 AM
  • Interesting view RV. I wasn't aware that Micah Johnson was a conservative. I would have thought that he would have been a liberal democrat.

    -- Posted by Liveforlight on Tue, Jul 12, 2016, at 10:42 AM
  • Everyone hear can argue,bring up facts and whatever information.The last week has proven there is a problem in our nation.In my opinion both sides are to blame.The further militarization of law enforcement departments is not a solution nor is using bombs to kill perpetrators.Only when both sides set aside there differences can we move forward.Good cops need to call out the bad ones just as good citizens need to call out the bad.This last weekend I helped worked a booth at a gun show teaching civil war history.Every security or police officer I came in contact with was professional and polite.Matter of fact a security officer in the parking garage gave me a jump when my battery went dead.Whether we like it or not we are all Americans and need to learn how to act like it.Accountability and responsibility need to apply to everyone not just a select few.My message to law enforcement officers,stop the aggressiveness, hate,racial profiling and militarization and maybe you can win back the publics trust.

    -- Posted by beau maverick on Tue, Jul 12, 2016, at 10:53 AM
  • RV too bad that armed citizens have stopped mass shootings before.

    Odd liberals demand perfection from non-governmental solutions but they don't hold government to that same standard

    -- Posted by quietmike on Tue, Jul 12, 2016, at 11:44 AM
  • Name calling,labeling individuals will not get anything accomplished.Last I checked our laws apply to everyone no who you are.Trouble is each party and group has its own agenda.I don't have all the answers but am willing to hear all sides.One thing is for sure,the violence needs to stop.No more street thugs and no more law enforcement thugs.The door swings both ways.

    -- Posted by beau maverick on Tue, Jul 12, 2016, at 1:57 PM
  • As I said earlier, LEOs are a necessary evil. We need them but we have to keep an eye on them at the same time. Because they have a gun and a license to kill not just thugs and criminals, but you and me.

    We need only the best of the best to be LEOs, therefore the discipline and firing of officers needs to be much more stringent. We must hold them to a higher standard because we have granted them so much power to affect all our lives in both good and in horrible ways.

    Dale Hansen, from the ABC affiliate in Dallas said it better than I can.


    -- Posted by ClarkDV on Tue, Jul 12, 2016, at 5:43 PM
  • I'm with you on all points.Once you have had your civil rights and constitutional rights violated by cops,your whole view changes.You never forget and look at all of them with suspicion.I speak from experience and hope others never experience that.Trust is a easy thing to lose but hard thing to win back.

    -- Posted by beau maverick on Tue, Jul 12, 2016, at 8:31 PM
  • *

    well, there you have it gun control freeks! A truck driver has killed at least 75 people in Nice, France, with one atempt. He also had a gun, but not sure if he shot anyone. The truck mangled the bodies and left them dead or dying. More Gun control laws wouldn't have helped any of those people.

    There just isn't an easy answer to the terrorist attacks. There is no defense against an attack that isn't know about. There is no details about who, what, when or where. How do you prepare for that? You can't!

    -- Posted by sui on Thu, Jul 14, 2016, at 8:23 PM
  • Sui

    You know that only happened because it's easier to get a truck than a book in France.

    -- Posted by quietmike on Thu, Jul 14, 2016, at 10:17 PM
  • *

    It's not funny and it could just as easily happen in the USA! You don't have to have a gun to kill people. Obama needs to wake up.

    -- Posted by sui on Fri, Jul 15, 2016, at 2:01 PM
  • *

    Maybe we should do background checks and have a waiting period to buy trucks. Oh, wait a minute, we don't have a constitutional right to keep and bear trucks. Never mind.

    -- Posted by fair share on Fri, Jul 15, 2016, at 2:16 PM
  • Obama isn't the problem, only a symptom.

    A population that would elect a buffoon like him, twice, is the real problem.

    -- Posted by quietmike on Fri, Jul 15, 2016, at 2:21 PM
  • The NRA says what happened in France could have been avoided if everyone in the crowd also had a truck.

    Ok...I stole that one from a popular talk show host.

    -- Posted by Rocket Valentine on Fri, Jul 15, 2016, at 8:28 PM
  • Well, logically speaking, it would be much tougher to mow down a quarter mile worth of people if they were each surrounded with two tons of steel.

    Even in jest, liberalism makes no sense.

    -- Posted by quietmike on Sat, Jul 16, 2016, at 12:20 PM
  • America elected a buffoon like Bush twice in a row. Many Americans are lining up to elect King Buffoon in 2016. And we don't have a constitutional right to bear arms. We have a constitutional rights to bear arms in order to have a well regulated militia. How many gun owners do you know that belong to a well regulated militia? Exactly.

    -- Posted by ClarkDV on Sun, Jul 17, 2016, at 12:13 AM
  • *

    ClarkDV, Boy was that a STUPID evaluation.

    First the constitution says the Congress is to ARM and TRAIN the Militia.

    When has the Congress Armed and Trained the Militia and told them to keep and bear those arms at home and at work?

    The States Arm and Train their National Guard and the weapons remain in the National Guard Armory. The Militia (National Guard as you suggest) DO NOT KEEP The ARMS and take them home with them so they will be armed at all times.

    Article I, Section 8, Clause 15

    To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union,suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; (Congress only has the power to use the State Militias to suppress insurrection and repel invasions)

    Article I, Section 8, Clause 16

    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

    (Congress organizes, arms and provides disciplining the Militia, put only governs the Part of them used by the Service of the United States and reserving to the states, the appointment of Officers and the actual training According to the discipline prescribed by Congress)

    So Congress only has power to Arm and use the state Militias.

    Now if you look at the Bill of Rights, Article 2, A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

    The people are not the Militia! The Congress Arms the Militia and they don't arm the Militia (National Guard Units) with BB guns or Muskets. They arm the Militias with military weapons (ARMS). These arms are kept at the NG Armory and not taken home to keep on their bodies at all times.

    If you want a weapon (ARMS) you must buy the weapon yourself because Congress doesn't arm the people. Only the Military and the Militias. So your right to buy (ARMS) that you can KEEP and BEAR is a right the Government can not infringe upon, because the Government doesn't provide them for you. "Learn your Rights"!

    -- Posted by sui on Sun, Jul 17, 2016, at 5:08 PM
  • *

    And now we have a new war on Law Enforcement Officers.

    They even said today that the shooter belonged to a sovereign citizen group.

    There is no such thing as a Sovereign Citizen.

    A Sovereign is a man or woman who has unalienable Rights and is a Sui Juris.

    A Sovereign has no authority over him or her. They must govern themselves. A Sovereign doesn't go around killing people. A Sovereign knows the law (singular) and obeys it. A Sovereign doesn't infringe upon other people's rights and keeps his/her contracts.

    A Citizen is a SUBJECT to the United States Corporation or the United Nations Corporation.

    A U.S. Citizen is included as the enemy to the United States anytime this country is in a state of emergency or at war.

    A U.S. Citizen is a 14th Amendment Citizen who only has Benefits and Privileges given to them by the United States Government in the Civil Rights Act.

    The Killer, so far, has been said to be a black man. At best he is a U.S. Citizen who had Civil Rights, but not Sovereign Rights, so he was NOT a Sovereign Man. He was an enemy to the United States. (And now we have a new war on Law Enforcement Officers.

    They even said today that the shooter belonged to a sovereign citizen group.

    There is no such thing as a Sovereign Citizen.

    A Sovereign is a man or woman who has unalienable Rights and is a Sui Juris.

    A Sovereign has no authority over him or her. They must govern themselves. A Sovereign doesn't go around killing people. A Sovereign knows the law (singular) and obeys it. A Sovereign doesn't infringe upon other people's rights and keeps his/her contracts.

    A Citizen is a SUBJECT to the United States Corporation or the United Nations Corporation.

    A U.S. Citizen is included as the enemy to the United States anytime this country is in a state of emergency or at war.

    A U.S. Citizen is a 14th Amendment Citizen who only has Benefits and Privileges given to them by the United States Government in the Civil Rights Act.

    The Killer, so far, has been said to be a black man. At best he is a U.S. Citizen who had Civil Rights, but not Sovereign Rights, so he was NOT a Sovereign Man.

    He was an enemy to the United States. (Trading with the enemy act of 1917), (Act of 1917), (War Powers Act) and the Trading with the Enemy Act as authorized by Proclamation 2039, in sec. 5(b), as it was enacted in 1933 by President FDR, which gave the President the power to license ALL immigrants (14th amendment citizens- enemy to the United States). These were licenses to do what the Sovereign people had a right to do - work, fish. hunt, travel, marry, own property, etc..

    -- Posted by sui on Sun, Jul 17, 2016, at 5:58 PM
  • It would seem to me the entire purpose of all of this is to further the gun control agenda.

    One of the things repeatedly parroted by the media was that the police didn't shoot the black men because of race, but because they had a gun. The implication being that if they had no gun they wouldn't have been shot.

    There is an intense push by the media and political leaders to eliminate private ownership of guns. They are the ones to blame for inciting riots, encouraging the killings, and endangering the lives of others. Police casualties serve the same purpose.

    Remember the issue is not the issue, power is the issue. In these peoples minds, the end justifies the means. The means being to increase gun violence in order to secure gun control. They care nothing for the people being killed, only for the power they can gain.

    -- Posted by Liveforlight on Sun, Jul 17, 2016, at 9:49 PM
  • While I am sure that they take advantage of every opportunity, I SURE HOPE (and you probably do too) that the intentional inciting of violence to achieve gun control is not a planned out process.

    -- Posted by stevemills on Sun, Jul 17, 2016, at 9:58 PM
  • sui,

    I'm lazy so I didn't read all of your multiple posts but here is another person's reply to your thoughts that I found interesting.


    -- Posted by ClarkDV on Sun, Jul 17, 2016, at 11:04 PM
  • steve mills,

    I don't think there's any intentional anything going on here. I think it's all reactionary and poorly, if at all, planned. Remember, we're talking about humans, we react primitively first and rationally second (or sometimes third or fourth!)

    Conspiracy theories are intriguing to ponder but are very low on the scale of probability.

    The US is changing and progress is scary to many of our citizens, and some of us are acting out. This too shall pass.

    -- Posted by ClarkDV on Sun, Jul 17, 2016, at 11:10 PM
  • Steve, no I don't think the inciting of riots is intentional. I think the increase in reporting of gun violence is intentional. The goal being to sway public opinion in order to implement increased gun control laws.

    The fact that riots result is because the media reports issues without all evidence or full story. The protests and riots help feed the frenzy.

    As far as a conspiracy, there absolutely is one. It is not secret and it has a benevolent face, but it is a conspiracy. You can read all about here.


    -- Posted by Liveforlight on Mon, Jul 18, 2016, at 5:56 AM
  • @liveforlight - There absolutely is a conspiracy, huh? LOL OK, this thread just lost my interest. Enjoy your meeting of Conspiracy Nutjobs Anonymous.

    -- Posted by ClarkDV on Mon, Jul 18, 2016, at 11:28 AM
  • TLDR. If you can't make a solid point in a few sentences, a few more aren't going to help. Brevity, man, brevity!

    -- Posted by ClarkDV on Mon, Jul 18, 2016, at 2:52 PM
  • To be brief, and to use your own words:

    "They just want to keep talking no matter what they have to say to fill in the minutes. No logic to what they say."

    That describes your posts perfectly, sui.

    The constitution, especially the 2nd amendment, is worded poorly. It should have been crystal clear whether the authors were for or against citizens owning firearms. But it's not clear, and we're still arguing over wording like "well regulated militia" over 200 years later.

    The bible is guilty of the same thing, a deity COULD have made his commands crystal clear but he didn't. (Most likely because man wrote it, not any deity, but that's a different argument for another day.)

    -- Posted by ClarkDV on Mon, Jul 18, 2016, at 2:58 PM
  • Liveforlight,

    I briefly scanned through the article that you posted a link to.

    Could you share with me the reasoning you captured for linking this to a conspiracy.

    I am not disagreeing with you but I am lacking on ability to see the tie.

    -- Posted by Blessed Assurance on Mon, Jul 18, 2016, at 5:11 PM
  • Blessed Assurance: The reason to me is clear, There is an agenda, "This is an Agenda of unprecedented scope and significance."

    There are heads of state, industry, media, and the worlds most powerful people working in unison. (conspirators)

    The word "conspiracy" is harder to apply because most of this is not secret. Except for the fact that they make the publicly disclosed details so cumbersome that most will quickly get tired of trying to sort it all out and simply withdraw. At least two posts on here, including yours, show that to be true. This alone makes what is in plain sight become practically secret.

    You have to be willing to put in the time to read and think about what the agenda is and how it will be implemented. The fact and evidence that it is happening is all around us once you become aware of it.

    I will give you 2 examples based on the stated Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs):

    Goal 1.) End poverty everywhere:

    While this sounds like a great goal, how is it to be carried out? If you read the material, they point the finger at income inequality. Look then at what is being done about income inequality in the U.S. It is basically seizure/taxation and re-distribution of wealth through social programs (socialism).

    Goal 5.) Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls:

    If you read this you will find that the intention is to promote women, not promote equality, but women. Specifically, the agenda is to "eliminate discrimination against women". This wording (against women) alone tells you there is a plan to discriminate in favor of women. Otherwise, the goal would just be "to eliminate discrimination." If you read further there is an active push to put women in more places of authority. This is one reason I believe Hillary will be elected. Look at who has been selected as an opponent. Could there be a candidate that is more likely to see her seated as president?

    To learn more simply Google "Agenda 2030".

    Be blessed :)

    -- Posted by Liveforlight on Mon, Jul 18, 2016, at 6:34 PM
  • Wow,this is going in a different direction. I have to say that there is something going in our nation. First off a amendment passed in 1868,the 14th amendment is coming back to haunt us.Number 2,we spend to much arguing about the Constitution and only seem to want to pick and choose what suits our immediate need or want. Number 3,we've dumbed down everything so much that the less educated are taken advantage of. Example,the mortgage crisis back in 08.Number 4,we have the public and those sworn to uphold the law think it doesn't apply to them.Fault is on both sides.Number 5,we make excuses instead of taking action on issues.Number 6,no nation or society can legislate itself out of trouble or tax it's citizens in order to redistribute the wealth.Our current situation is bad but still statistically better than the past.Trouble is media blows everything out of proportion.

    -- Posted by beau maverick on Mon, Jul 18, 2016, at 9:17 PM
  • ClarkDV,

    To understand the founders meaning of the second,look at the contemporary laws of the time.

    Private citizens owned warships, cannons, and rifles that were superior to the arms of the government. Congress granted these folks letters of Marque and Reprisal to use those arms in the service of the country.

    The founders were also clear that the purpose of the second was a final check and balance against a tyrannical government. What type of arms would be best suited to do this?

    -- Posted by quietmike on Tue, Jul 19, 2016, at 12:10 PM
  • And again, they were also part of a militia, not just a bunch of dudes with guns running wild as we have today. Given the size of our nation and the limited means of long distance communication back then, they were probably not as well-regulated as the founders meant for them to be, but they did mean for them to be regulated, controlled, trained, etc.

    These 4 paragraphs are from the link I posted earlier:

    "The term "well regulated" in the 2nd amendment actually encompasses both meanings of the term "well regulated" (i.e., "well regulated" as one might consider a clock to be, and "well regulated" as one might think of in a legal framework)!

    "Well regulated" meant that State militias were to be well trained (i.e., they were to gather together and practice, drill, etc., on a regular basis) and that training was to be supervised by the States (i.e., the States were to appoint officers who were to oversee that training). (This was the clock-like aspect of "well regulated".)

    But at the same time, "well regulated" also referred to the lawful power the Congress (which was comprised, after all, of representatives of the States) was to have over the State militias, that is, Congress was to promulgate and enact a system of rules governing the conduct and/or activity of said militias, as well as the legal authority the President would have over them when acting as Commander-in-Chief. (This was the legal aspect of "well regulated".)

    In other words, the use of the term "well regulated" in the 2nd amendment wasn't meant to be an 'either-or', 'black-and-white' proposition, it was meant to be an all-inclusive term that covered all possible aspects of the situation viz a viz militias."

    -- Posted by ClarkDV on Tue, Jul 19, 2016, at 2:06 PM
  • Police are pushing back against the open carry law in several states.Does any one on this blog agree with them?

    -- Posted by lets be real on Tue, Jul 19, 2016, at 5:20 PM
  • I do not see a reason to carry a pistol in the open. I prefer to conceal and open carry seems to encurage a challenge.

    Good question for those who want to carry unconcealed, Why?

    -- Posted by stevemills on Tue, Jul 19, 2016, at 7:31 PM
  • Liveforlight,

    I went back and read Goal 1.

    Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere

    1.1 By 2030, eradicate extreme poverty for all people everywhere, currently measured as people living on less than $1.25 a day.

    Don't you think that is a goal worth trying to accomplish?

    Don't you think that first of all even the "Church" should put this as a priority over such things as building a bigger and prettier sticks and stones building or buying new guitars and drums?

    This is a conspiracy?

    Just curious.

    -- Posted by Blessed Assurance on Tue, Jul 19, 2016, at 9:14 PM
  • BA you obviously missed the point. Yes, ending poverty is absolutely a GREAT goal. But, HOW is that to be done, is that REALLY the intent or just a means to an end?

    Here is a link that might help you understand better. It is long so it will take some of your time.


    -- Posted by Liveforlight on Tue, Jul 19, 2016, at 9:42 PM
  • Open or concealed carry is a issue I have mixed feelings about. On one hand I don't want citizens carrying because in my experience too many of them are stupid and ill-tempered.

    On the other hand, many cops are also stupid and ill-tempered, so I don't like that they're the only ones with guns either!

    -- Posted by ClarkDV on Wed, Jul 20, 2016, at 3:05 AM
  • Interesting point ClarkDV.

    I would not want my right to carry determined by a maturity test (not maternity) or one that tests responsibility, but....

    The police must go through some of that (or at least TV cops do LOL) but not much is done for us citizens who want to carry?

    In addition to that, maybe a stress test that sees how you react to pressure. Especially if you are going to be allowed to carry on an academic campus of any kind.

    Knowing how to handle, shoot and respect a firearm is NOT anywhere near the same as using it under pressure. The more I talk about it the more I like the idea.

    Failing the pressure test would not be a refusal to carry but it would require more training of that nature. Maybe if I fail it three times I have to wait X years to mature more or..... maybe it is downgraded to a pellet gun. :-)

    -- Posted by stevemills on Wed, Jul 20, 2016, at 8:10 AM
  • I think the media/gun issue is 2 pronged with 2 separate but simultaneous goals.

    1.) Bring federal and/or U.N. oversight/control to local police departments.

    2.) Eliminate/reduce private ownership of guns.

    Again, the issue is not the issue, power is the issue. Better yet, the lack of accountability which is the ultimate power.

    Whether or not the people are foolish enough to relinquish their rights to governments/politicians that do not obey or enforce its' own laws, remains to be seen. But it is surely moving in that direction.

    -- Posted by Liveforlight on Wed, Jul 20, 2016, at 10:43 PM
  • It's a touchy and complicated issue.High capacity magazines,bullet proof vests,c4,robots,automatic weapons, cell phone cameras,hollow point bullets,armored vehicles and tasers have changed the game.Who would've imagined that kind of advanvements or weaponry.We as a nation need to put aside our differences in order to bring a change.I for one believe we need to make a better world for our children.

    -- Posted by beau maverick on Thu, Jul 21, 2016, at 5:08 PM
  • Agreed beau, but we have to be careful what the definition of "a better world" is and from whose perspective that judgment is made.

    To me, a better world is one which is free from plundering of life, liberty, and possessions. That is the only justified application of the law. When the law itself commits these acts, and there is no accountability, then we are headed in the wrong direction.

    -- Posted by Liveforlight on Thu, Jul 21, 2016, at 10:25 PM
  • Very well said.If we want a better world then it needs to start with the Law.We are dealing with the bad seeds they've sown over the last century.I wrote a paper on this many years ago in college.Titled Accountability of Law Enforcement. This was after the Rodney King riots,Randy Weaver,Waco and the bombing in Oklahoma.I felt we needed a overhaul back then before things really get out of hand.Now today we see needless killing by both sides,uncontrolled rioting and a total lack of respect from both sides.We can argue,criticize or fight each other but at the end of the day, the law took a oath which holds them to a higher standard than the rest of us.However,several us try to set a high standard and help others to achieve it.I have to say that the Birmingham police department and the security for the Civic center there,definitely impressed me with there service and support.I'll work a gun show anytime.We always here about the bad but how about the good cops?We as a naton are at a crossroads and need to take the right direction.As stated before,very well said.

    -- Posted by beau maverick on Thu, Jul 21, 2016, at 11:24 PM
  • The law definitely needs change. I think you are absolutely right. It has gotten out of hand over the last century or more. Unfortunately, I don't think it will get straighten out, although it could, before we hit bottom. Knowing we are on the wrong course and correcting it is two different things.

    It has really gotten worse since "The Creature from Jekyll Island" was released. This gave legislators the ability to spend money without having to pass it through the filter of the voting public. This constitutes an incredible leap in the power to plunder others.

    The real question is how do we effect the right changes? The law, meaning the written law, not necessarily the representatives or enforcers of it, must change first.

    To my knowledge there is no better model laid out than Frederic Bastiat's "The Law" found at this link.


    -- Posted by Liveforlight on Fri, Jul 22, 2016, at 6:20 AM
  • I believe we all have lots of questions and concerns

    -- Posted by beau maverick on Fri, Jul 22, 2016, at 9:50 AM
  • Law Enforcement reform can only happen when we, the people, stop letting them get away with bending the rules that the rest of us have to live be or be arrested.

    I watch First Amendment Audit videos on YouTube because they shine the spotlight on bad LEOs, as well as point out the good ones.

    A First Amendment Audit is when a citizen goes out in public and films video, usually at a place that is sure to draw LEO attention, such as police departments, jails, post offices, courthouses, etc.

    The 1st Amendment to the Constitution and the Supreme Court says that ALL of us have the right to stand on public property and film or take photos of anything we can see, including public officials as they conduct official business.

    Watch just a handful of these videos and you will quickly see that most LEOs have very little concern for our rights and often become extremely aggressive just because someone is filming in public and dares to stand up to them and assert their right to do so.

    You have to ask yourself, if so many LEOs are aggressive, bullying, and intimidating to a citizen with a camera just filming in public, how likely is it that those same LEOs are going to be quick to batter or kill a citizen during a traffic stop or other service call?

    And the people who always side with the LEOs and seem eager to give up their rights in order to feel a sense of security are only making matters worse. And that sense of security, I believe, is false, when you are empowering and emboldening the very people you have hired to protect you.

    And we also must remember that key word, "hire". LEOs are public servants, they are hired guns. It's a job that they applied for and that they are paid to do. Often some of them do heroic things in the line of duty, but they're not all heroes just because they show up for work.

    Sorry for the length of the post, I couldn't make it any shorter and cover all the points I wanted to make.

    -- Posted by ClarkDV on Fri, Jul 22, 2016, at 12:41 PM
  • You have brought up some very valid points.I'd like to add that a good LEO should be able to put aside personal feelings,judgements and aggressiveness when dealing with the public.Just because I'm driving thru the same area at about the same time every night doesn't make me a drug runner.Or because I work at a bar,it doesn't mean I'm drunk or do drugs

    There is fault on both sides but unfortunately for them,they took a oath and are upheld to higher standards.

    -- Posted by beau maverick on Fri, Jul 22, 2016, at 2:10 PM
Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration: