New rioting and looting in Minneapolis

[laughing dog]

Did you miss the part about more that 100 people being hit by people deliberately driving into crowds as of June 2020???

Are you aware that such incidents happen during protests with permits???

You recognize that it’s illegal to run people down. Right?

You mean when they used their bikes to block traffic and drivers get pissed off? WTF do you expect? If you don’t give a shit about other people, why should they give a shit about you?

This driver saw the cars blocking the road and the people behind it. We know this because he has said so. He also said he sped up in order to vault the car. It is ridiculous to think anyone deserved to killed by this drunk asshat.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

What "peaceful protesters" were attacked?

One dirtbag starts something, the police retaliate against the group that was doing nothing wrong. The dirtbag likely has nothing to do with the protest. The police go arresting the leaders, the DAs throw out the charges because the police had nothing on them in the first place. Rinse and repeat.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Like the 1/6 Capitol insurrection?

Like the person who deliberately drove his car into protesters in St Paul/Minneapolis, Seattle, So many it's hard to keep up. More than 104 people have been struck and sometimes killed by cars driving into protesters---as of A YEAR AGO.(https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...amming-attacks-66-us-since-may-27/5397700002/)

Who knows how many over the past year. Is that the kind of violence you're talking about?

There’s a reason there are laws against walking on or blocking roads. Hello?

It is ALWAYS illegal to drive your motor vehicle into another person. ALWAYS.

Always? It can be legal in self defense.

 

[Toni]

It is ALWAYS illegal to drive your motor vehicle into another person. ALWAYS.

Always? It can be legal in self defense.

I think you're wrong about that. Arguably, if you are in a motor vehicle that is operational, you can escape the threat. I suppose accidentally hitting someone can be a defense but not purposely driving you vehicle into someone.

Of course, this may be viewed differently in a war situation. And I mean actual war, not KKK vs Antifa.

 

[Patooka]

It's statements like this that allow intimate moments between one's face and one's palm.

There isn't much of a correlation between a shooting being unjustified and #BLMers getting upset over it. Some questionable shootings result in crickets, while pretty clear cut ones result in riots.

Reality would like to know why you are ghosting it. Honestly, if you are so fucking stupid to believe how police act wasn't a primary motive in the creation of the BLM movement, I really don't know what to say.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It is ALWAYS illegal to drive your motor vehicle into another person. ALWAYS.

Always? It can be legal in self defense.

I think you're wrong about that. Arguably, if you are in a motor vehicle that is operational, you can escape the threat. I suppose accidentally hitting someone can be a defense but not purposely driving you vehicle into someone.

Of course, this may be viewed differently in a war situation. And I mean actual war, not KKK vs Antifa.

I'm thinking of a video I saw where a cop deliberately rammed a pedestrian--unusual but the proper action in the situation. It was a situation where deadly force would have been proper and the cop didn't have a clean shot.

Or in a case more likely to happen to a civilian--you're under attack by someone in front of your car. (Or perhaps by a mob all around your car.)

I have been a passenger in a vehicle that deliberately accelerated in response to people in the road--completely legal, the driver was following the directions of the local authorities. (And the instructions included not stopping if there was a collision.) The road-blockers knew the score, they got out of the way just in time. (The road-blockers were bandits, but they didn't have firearms.)

 

[Toni]

I think you're wrong about that. Arguably, if you are in a motor vehicle that is operational, you can escape the threat. I suppose accidentally hitting someone can be a defense but not purposely driving you vehicle into someone.

Of course, this may be viewed differently in a war situation. And I mean actual war, not KKK vs Antifa.

I'm thinking of a video I saw where a cop deliberately rammed a pedestrian--unusual but the proper action in the situation. It was a situation where deadly force would have been proper and the cop didn't have a clean shot.

Or in a case more likely to happen to a civilian--you're under attack by someone in front of your car. (Or perhaps by a mob all around your car.)

I have been a passenger in a vehicle that deliberately accelerated in response to people in the road--completely legal, the driver was following the directions of the local authorities. (And the instructions included not stopping if there was a collision.) The road-blockers knew the score, they got out of the way just in time. (The road-blockers were bandits, but they didn't have firearms.)

Oh, yeah, I forget: laws don't apply to police officers. There was a recent video of a police officer using his car to flip over the car of a woman who had slowed down, signaled that she was pulling over then put on her hazard lights to indicate that she acknowledged the police officer pulling her over and was moving to a safe place to pull over. The woman was pregnant. And was doing exactly what her state said to do if asked to pull over on an unsafe stretch of road.

https://katv.com/news/local/nlr-wom...pursuit-led-to-her-car-flipped-while-pregnant

Here's an online copy of the Arkansas state drivers manual. See page 3 (you can use the little + to make it large enough to read)

https://driving-tests.org/arkansas/ar-dmv-drivers-handbook-manual/

In a really neat bit of irony, the Arkansas governor just signed a bill that would enact an almost total ban on abortion, just to get a hearing at the Supreme Court. https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/21/poli...n-abortion-law-supreme-court-cnntv/index.html

Go Pro Life?

 

[Derec]

There was a recent video of a police officer using his car to flip over the car of a woman

Even if that PIT maneuver in a completely different state was improper, what does that have to do with blockading streets in uptown Minneapolis for two weeks?

And one thing about gun control. "Liberals" talk a good game about it, but they are more concerned about banning things like "shoulder things that go up" and less with the real problem, which is criminals with guns. Criminals like robbers Daunte Wright (described as "prince of Brooklyn Center") and Winston Smith (described as "comedian and revolutionary").

 

[Toni]

There was a recent video of a police officer using his car to flip over the car of a woman

Even if that PIT maneuver in a completely different state was improper, what does that have to do with blockading streets in uptown Minneapolis for two weeks?

And one thing about gun control. "Liberals" talk a good game about it, but they are more concerned about banning things like "shoulder things that go up" and less with the real problem, which is criminals with guns. Criminals like robbers Daunte Wright (described as "prince of Brooklyn Center") and Winston Smith (described as "comedian and revolutionary").

I believe the convo went:
Me: it’s always illegal to drive a car into pedestrians
Loren: no, it’s not here’s some examples including one invoking a police officer
Me: oh yeah, police officers don’t have to follow laws, apparently, especially in states that are way right to life

So that’s how that went.

What? Do you subscribe to Black people You Should Be Afraid Of Digest?

I think no matter what, some things criminals will get access to guns. We can do a lot more to limit that and we can do a lot more to ensure that ignorant idiots have less access to firearms.

 

[Derec]

Reality would like to know why you are ghosting it. Honestly, if you are so fucking stupid to believe how police act wasn't a primary motive in the creation of the BLM movement, I really don't know what to say.

Of course police, of rather the left-wing extremist activists' (remember, #BLM was started by two trained Marxists!) hostility toward police was the primary motive in the creation of that movement. No argument there. However, I do not think it had anything to do with any wrongdoing by police. Michael Brown was not a victim of police brutality, and yet his self-inflicted death triggered the very first #BLM riots. And look at Jacob Blake. He did not even die, was armed and had a warrant for sexual assault. His, as it turned out later, not only triggered incredibly destructive and violent (even deadly) rioting in Kenosha but our vice president even said she was "proud" of him.

 

[laughing dog]

Reality would like to know why you are ghosting it. Honestly, if you are so fucking stupid to believe how police act wasn't a primary motive in the creation of the BLM movement, I really don't know what to say.

Of course police, of rather the left-wing extremist activists' (remember, #BLM was started by two trained Marxists!) hostility toward police was the primary motive in the creation of that movement. No argument there. However, I do not think it had anything to do with any wrongdoing by police. Michael Brown was not a victim of police brutality, and yet his self-inflicted death triggered the very first #BLM riots.

Michael Brown did not commit suicide.

And look at Jacob Blake. He did not even die, was armed and had a warrant for sexual assault.

None of which is relevant to the issue of his being shot 7 times in the back while he was in his car with children in the back seat.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Michael Brown did not commit suicide.

Goalposts!

He said "self inflicted", not "suicide". He didn't intend to die, but his death was due to his actions.

And look at Jacob Blake. He did not even die, was armed and had a warrant for sexual assault.

None of which is relevant to the issue of his being shot 7 times in the back while he was in his car with children in the back seat.

Can we have an end to the idea of considering shooting in the back as evidence of right or wrong? It can be relevant as to what's going on, but it is not proof of anything other than the position of the person when the trigger was pulled.

I'm sure he simply wanted to escape--there's no way the police were going to allow that. Thus, his actions had left the police in a situation they were going to have to use force, the only question being what level of force. By appearing to go for a weapon he made that force gun rather than taser.

 

[Rhea]

I'm sure he simply wanted to escape--there's no way the police were going to allow that.

Why. The Fuck. Not?
Whhy was there “no way” the police would let him escape? Why do they and you think it needs to be a death sentence? A death sentence with no judge?

Cops let criminals go all the time. They catch them later. They know who they are, they follow them and catch them later.

Where do you get this idea that “arrested or dead!!” Is acceptable or even normal?

 

[laughing dog]

Goalposts!

He said "self inflicted", not "suicide". He didn't intend to die, but his death was due to his actions.

and the actions of the police.

Can we have an end to the idea of considering shooting in the back as evidence of right or wrong? It can be relevant as to what's going on, but it is not proof of anything other than the position of the person when the trigger was pulled.

I'm sure he simply wanted to escape--there's no way the police were going to allow that. Thus, his actions had left the police in a situation they were going to have to use force, the only question being what level of force. By appearing to go for a weapon he made that force gun rather than taser.

There were other officers there and he was sitting in his car- he wasn’t going anywhere quickly. There were children in the car and his back was turned which means the officer was not in immediate danger. Moreover, the weapon he appeared to be moving to was a knife not a firearm. Those facts make your response laughable.

 

[thebeave]

I'm sure he simply wanted to escape--there's no way the police were going to allow that.

Why. The Fuck. Not?
Whhy was there “no way” the police would let him escape? Why do they and you think it needs to be a death sentence? A death sentence with no judge?

Cops let criminals go all the time. They catch them later. They know who they are, they follow them and catch them later.

Where do you get this idea that “arrested or dead!!” Is acceptable or even normal?

There were kids in the backseat of the car. The guy is obviously reckless, no telling what he would have done. As a minimum, he probably would have sped off at high speed, putting the kids' lives in danger. What would you do in that situation? Let him get away and just cross your fingers that the innocent children don't end up dead?

 

[Toni]

I'm sure he simply wanted to escape--there's no way the police were going to allow that.

Why. The Fuck. Not?
Whhy was there “no way” the police would let him escape? Why do they and you think it needs to be a death sentence? A death sentence with no judge?

Cops let criminals go all the time. They catch them later. They know who they are, they follow them and catch them later.

Where do you get this idea that “arrested or dead!!” Is acceptable or even normal?

There were kids in the backseat of the car. The guy is obviously reckless, no telling what he would have done. As a minimum, he probably would have sped off at high speed, putting the kids' lives in danger. What would you do in that situation? Let him get away and just cross your fingers that the innocent children don't end up dead?

Fire into a closed vehicle containing small children and hope they don’t get killed? They were horribly traumatized. The POLiCE put those children’s lives in danger!

 

[Derec]

Fire into a closed vehicle containing small children and hope they don’t get killed? They were horribly traumatized. The POLiCE put those children’s lives in danger!

The police officer fired in the opposite direction, not into the vehicle, which btw. wasn't "closed". The children weren't in any real danger. Stop hyperventilating!

 

[Derec]

There were other officers there and he was sitting in his car- he wasn’t going anywhere quickly. There were children in the car and his back was turned which means the officer was not in immediate danger.

But the children were in immediate danger, as far as the officer could tell.
Look at it from the point of view of the officers. This is how the confrontation started.

At 5:11 p.m. Kenosha police said officers responded to a call of a "domestic incident" in the 2800 block of 40th Street. In a 911 call, Laquisha Booker told police that Blake had the keys to her rental car and was refusing to give them back. "And on top of that he's not supposed to be here," she is heard saying.
As officers responded to the scene, dispatch told them Blake has a felony arrest warrant for domestic abuse charges and sexual assault, according to Kenosha County District Attorney Michael Graveley.
According to an investigation by the district attorney's office, Officer Rusten Sheskey arrived at the scene and saw Blake putting a child into the vehicle mentioned on the 911 call. At that time, he heard Laquisha Booker yell "It's him! It's him!" Sheskey said Blake then said he's "taking the kid, and I'm taking the car."

It ended with Blake shrugging off the attempts to taze him and then, knife in hand, walking to the driver side door of the vehicle in question, with two children in the back seat.
It totally looked like a kidnapping.

Timeline: How the Jacob Blake Shooting Unfolded

Moreover, the weapon he appeared to be moving to was a knife not a firearm. Those facts make your response laughable.

He wasn't going for a knife, he already had it in his hand, having previously picked it up.

“I realized I had dropped my knife, had a little pocket knife. So I picked it up after I got off of him because they tased me and I fell on top of him,” Blake explained to ABC's Michael Strahan in an interview that aired on ABC’s Good Morning America (GMA).
“I shouldn’t have picked it up, only considering what was going on,” he continued. “At that time, I wasn’t thinking clearly.” In early January, Kenosha County district attorney Michael Graveley said that he would not file charges against the officer who shot Blake seven times, because the he was acting in self-defense against an armed assailant. Blake had a history of resisting police arrest using a knife.
Blake’s admission flies in the face of past statements from his family and attorneys, who vehemently denied that he had a knife on him when police shot him on August 23, in an incident that came about from a 911 call made by the mother of Blake’s children, who told police that Blake was attempting to leave the area with two of his sons.
“My son didn’t have a weapon,” Blake’s father told the Chicago Sun-Times for an August 25 story. Patrick Salvi Jr., an attorney for the Blake family, told CNN that Blake didn't have a knife. “Witnesses confirm that he was not in possession of a knife and didn’t threaten officers in any way,” said Ben Crump, Blake's attorney, on August 27th.

Note also the lies by Blake's family and shysters.

Jacob Blake admits in interview to having a knife in his possession on day of police shooting

 

[Derec]

Why. The Fuck. Not?
Whhy was there “no way” the police would let him escape?

He was armed, had already resisted arrest, and he was about to steal a car with some kids in the back seat.
No cop worth their salt was just gonna let him go.

Why do they and you think it needs to be a death sentence? A death sentence with no judge?

A death sentence is punishment of somebody already in custody. Shooting somebody to stop them from kidnapping some kids is not a "death sentence". Not to mention that the guy is very much alive.

Cops let criminals go all the time. They catch them later. They know who they are, they follow them and catch them later.

And if they run again, should they let them go again? And then what?

Where do you get this idea that “arrested or dead!!” Is acceptable or even normal?

Newsflash. St. Jacob is alive and, well not completely well, but at least he'll be able to spend all those millions Kenosha will inevitably (and stupidly) pay him.

And btw, had he allowed the cops to simply arrest him, he'd still have the use of his legs and all of his colon. But I guess he thought laws did not apply to him.

 

[Derec]

Michael Brown did not commit suicide.

No shit, Sherlock! Does not mean he did not bring it on himself by acting with terminal stupidity.

None of which is relevant to the issue of his being shot 7 times in the back while he was in his car with children in the back seat.

Police were not going to let him steal the SUV and kidnap the children. Because that is the info the police had from the 911 call.