You think that the situation has gotten so bad that you're promoting armed revolution against the United States government. Tell me, what is it like to live in such a paranoid delusion? Are you expecting the black helicopters and MIB to show up at your doorstep any day now to arrest you for the totally courageous thing you said on this message board?
This is one concept that I have a hard time understanding. What leadership? Does the white community have objective leadership or any leadership? This isn't a high school club or sports team, there is no "Black community leader" just like there is no "Asian community leader" or "Hispanic community leader" or "White community leader" I guarantee the looters don't give a **** about this kid. They see an excuse for looting and chaos and jump at it. They need to be distinguished from the legitimate protesters. You are right, this no excuse for looting and vandalism. The police probably want nothing more than for rioting to happen. It makes the protesters look bad and distracts the public eye from the REAL issue.
R95- I said absolutely 0 about the police actions. I concur that the handling of the journalists was inappropriate. However, what would the narrative end up being had a white or black journalist ended up being killed in the scrum? I would imagine tear gas and rubber bullets would be justified to stop looting anywhere in the country. My problem is with the community leadership. If you are going to protest in a hotzone at night maybe have it be a more peaceful vigil? Just wait for the investigation to be conducted by a federal entity.
No, I missed how this is related to the incident above without more information. All I said is that I'm sure the police would have been called by some customer in a Walmart if a white guy was walking around with what was perceived to be a gun. And I have no idea what this guys reaction was to police. The article stated he wouldn't drop the "gun." Yes, if that was the exact same hypothetical situation with a white guy I don't think the outcome would be much different. Not saying more unarmed black people don't get shot by cops, just that using this particular instance as proof of it seems like a stretch without more info.
PR Note - when people accuse your police force of being unnecessarily violent, brutal, and a bunch of wannabe paramilitary asshats..... .....it's probably a good idea to not roll out with Sniper on top of an armored car.
Ah, so a limited armed insurrection. So how does this work, is shooting at the National Guard/Missouri police bad but shooting at the Ferguson police okay?
Except they weren't looting last night. They were standing and were fired upon by police. There's video of the police advance: http://new.livestream.com/accounts/9035483/events/3271930 The handling of the journalists wasn't just "inappropriate," it could be argued that it was unconstitutional.
You're asking more people to die for nothing. Also nobody outside of the kid that was shot in Wal-mart has died. My only hope is Obama marches the national guard over there and calms the situation down before a bunch of idiots start trying to wage a shootout with the cops. I would like to Ferguson PD brought to justice for all the atrocities they are committed over there as well, but civilians with handguns and maybe the occasional shotgun aren't going to do much against military-grade weaponry and decent weapons training. If you want a non-violent solution its going to have to be Obama.
So when you said the people should "take up arms" for "protection", you did not actually mean that they should shoot their guns? I thought I had been debating with someone who knew something about gun safety, and who understood that you never, ever pull out a gun unless you are prepared to fire it and face the consequences of doing so. It appears that I was mistaken.
Pretty much the argument for lessening gun ownership restrictions and for more civilian weapons training.
Yes for more training, no more lessening gun ownership restrictions. Look man, this is 1776. Armed militia can no longer stand against the full might of the United States federal military. We have the most powerful army and probably most powerful police force on Earth. If you want guns to protect you from fellow citizens, fine, but this pointless arms race against the government is futile. Build up a movement, do it politically, use the system. People are quick to say the system has failed, but maybe just maybe your opinions and thoughts just aren't gaining enough traction to justify being heard?
I'm for the restrictions of WHO can own guns, but I would relax some of the restrictions on WHAT those people can own.
As much as I'm against that idea, realistically people are going to get their hands on whatever guns they want. Too easy to buy weapons in this country so whatever law is in practice, won't even matter.
Well it'll matter for those who believe in following the law, but those generally aren't who you are worried about.
Its a sad state of affairs when people legitimately think they need something more powerful than pistols, rifles, and shotguns to protect themselves. Its also a sad state of affairs when illegal gun traffickers are fueling that arms race and the police go out and do something utterly stupid and unconstitutional to spark more gun fever.
Because nobody has ever displayed arms as a show of force and been sucessful... Wouldn't call this much of a debate. You seem to think I'm over here talking about overthrowing the government. This has nothing to do with the federals. At this point is as simple as a bunch of local police overstepping their boundaries and using unjust force in violation of the limits that are placed on them. They need to be reminded of who gives them the authority to use force.
