• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Judge shot at courthouse in Nevada (1 Viewer)

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,257
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Reno Nevada SWAT teams are searching for a possible sniper at this time.

Article is here.
 
danarhea said:
Reno Nevada SWAT teams are searching for a possible sniper at this time.
Article is here.

It doesnt take much for the media to label you a "sniper" hese days.

One can only imagine how apeshi'ite they'd be if a REAL sniper (or anyone with above average marskmanship skills) were picking people off.
 
I hope this in turn leads to calls for a beefing up of security throughout all of the courthouses in the United States because they are woefully underfunded by Congress and by most of the state congresses.
 
ShamMol said:
I hope this in turn leads to calls for a beefing up of security throughout all of the courthouses in the United States because they are woefully underfunded by Congress and by most of the state congresses.
This guy was standing near a 3rd-floor window and shot from outside.
What sort of 'security' would have stopped this shooting?
 
Last edited:
Goobieman said:
This guy was standing rear a 3rd-floor window and shot from outside.
What sort of 'security' would have stopped this shooting?
Frankly, not much. But I am just saying that this incident may draw attention to the situation that needs resolving that is our courts' security. The Blue Coats for the federal government sites are hapless, and more needs to be done for these public sevants.
 
ShamMol said:
Frankly, not much. But I am just saying that this incident may draw attention to the situation that needs resolving that is our courts' security. The Blue Coats for the federal government sites are hapless, and more needs to be done for these public sevants.

Its not the Federal government's job to protect state and local judges.
 
Goobieman said:
Its not the Federal government's job to protect state and local judges.
See my earlier post saying that they the state judges weren't being protected "by most of the state congresses." Stop arguing for the sake of arguing and just debate the topic which is judicial security.
 
ShamMol said:
See my earlier post saying that they the state judges weren't being protected "by most of the state congresses." Stop arguing for the sake of arguing and just debate the topic which is judicial security.
You mentiond Congress and most of the state [legislatures].

And I'm sure that someone will see some issue other than courtroom security.
 
Goobieman said:
You mentiond Congress and most of the state [legislatures].

And I'm sure that someone will see some issue other than courtroom security.
Well, here is how I see it. We have had shootings at judges or judges families a lot in the past few years and it is time that we do something more to protect them. The deserve it because without them, our country would go to hell in a hand basket.
 
ShamMol said:
I hope this in turn leads to calls for a beefing up of security throughout all of the courthouses in the United States because they are woefully underfunded by Congress and by most of the state congresses.

Somehow I doubt it, ShamMol. Congress is run by Republicans and they think that judges are "activists." They probably don't care, unless, of course, it involved Justice Scalia.
 
aps said:
Somehow I doubt it, ShamMol. Congress is run by Republicans and they think that judges are "activists." They probably don't care, unless, of course, it involved Justice Scalia.
Touche. But the point remains that on the federal bench, 75% of the judges were appointed by Republican presidents, which means that if they are activist, they are for their side most of the time. It is just this perception by the right of the big big cases being decided by liberal activist judges, which let's be honest, is true (from Roe to Brown). But they always forget about New London and stuff like that...very conviniently.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom