• 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!

LAPD DELIBERATELY shoots an Aussie Reporter with a rubber bullet

Allan said:
You're the only person who can't tell she's a reporter.

Even the cop knew.
Click to expand...

If a person does not want to get shot perhaps they should not stand in front of armed riot police during a riot.

.
 
Bodi said:
Bad things happen to people standing in a riot zone right in front of 50-armed riot police. I recommend not standing where she was.

And being a reporter, not wearing any identification that I could tell, is not some "get to go anywhere I want" excuse.


,


.
Click to expand...
if it were accidental, you would have a point...that wasn't accidental.
 
ClaraD said:
if it were accidental, you would have a point...that wasn't accidental.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. The cop should be investigated and probably fired... but she put herself there so claiming, 'but she is a reporter' is meaningless.


.
 
reinaert said:
No, captain, when you pull the trigger of a firearm, and a projectile fires out of it, you have shot it.
Click to expand...
Sure, and when you say "the reporter was shot," I'm sure everyone will know exactly what happened. :rolleyes:

reinaert said:
Or are you really arguing that skeet and target shooting aren't shooting?
Click to expand...
...what?
 
Bodi said:
I completely agree. The cop should be investigated and probably fired... but she put herself there so claiming, 'but she is a reporter' is meaningless.


.
Click to expand...
It’s not meaningless lol. What a moronic thing to say.
 
Bodi said:
If a person does not want to get shot perhaps they should not stand in front of armed riot police during a riot.

.
Click to expand...

I see no riot or mention of one and the police are behind her.
 
Grizzly Adams said:
What difference does it make anyway? She's not special and has no greater right to be in the middle of the street than anyone else.
Click to expand...
Uh, you can’t shoot a reporter simply for being in the middle of the street, reporting the news. Jesus Christ.
 
j brown's body said:
I see no riot or mention of one and the police are behind her.
Click to expand...

Right. In 15 seconds you can determine that there is no riot as there are 50 riot cops out in full gear... Cool.

When you are near a riot don't tell me that I never told you that you could get hurt.

... and she doesn't appear to be hurt in the slightest, at the end of the day. She is damn lucky and probably learned a lesson.
n
 
cpwill said:
That is not at all an "entirely different set of circumstances" with regard to whether or not it makes the President's rationalization of the Guard illegal, or whether that stands as precedent.

Presidential power is not determined by whether they are exercising it on behalf of a cause we support or oppose.

It's tragic how many Americans seem not to grasp that, or that any power they seize for their side today will be used by the other tomorrow.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is factually an entirely different set of circumstances. It has nothing at all to do with what presidential power is or exercising it for a cause. The tragedy is people making false equivalence of things that aren’t remotely the same. Thst is exactly what the Trump administration is doing with all of the phony uses of presidential power. They call things emergencies that are not and then invoke things that were meant for real emergencies. No president has pushed the limits like Trump has and has crossed into illegality so frequently and without any checks on them.
 
Bodi said:
Right. In 15 seconds you can determine that there is no riot as there are 50 riot cops out in full gear... Cool.

When you are near a riot don't tell me that I never told you that you could get hurt.

... and she doesn't appear to be hurt in the slightest, at the end of the day. She is damn lucky and probably learned a lesson.
n
Click to expand...

Cops in riot gear doesn’t mean a riot was taking place at that moment where this took place. Cops in riot gear also were there to corral people who were not rioting but were asked to disperse. Riot gear is standard for crowd control situations that could result in some violent actions.
 
Napoleon said:
There is no WTF. Disagree with their reasons all you like, but they had a grievance with the government and they took it to the government. Unlike the lunatic anarchists in LA and elsewhere who pillage, rape, and murder indiscriminately when they have a beef with the government.
Click to expand...
🤣
 
devildavid said:
Cops in riot gear doesn’t mean a riot was taking place at that moment where this took place. Cops in riot gear also were there to corral people who were not rioting but were asked to disperse. Riot gear is standard for crowd control situations that could result in some violent actions.
Click to expand...

It means the situation has escalated to potential violence and that is what matters... There are people all over the street being disorderly. I have already said that the cop is wrong and should be investigated or fired... but we shouldn't pretend that being around agitated cops raising and lowering their guns with mounted cops and all that is some safe place.


g
 
devildavid said:
Yes, it is factually an entirely different set of circumstances
Click to expand...

Ah. So - to be clear - the President is NOT federalizing the Guard over the objections of state and local leadership to support enforcement of federal law that is locally unpopular to the point of violence?

Well, if that's the case, what is all this fuss about?

devildavid said:
They call things emergencies that are not and then invoke things that were meant for real emergencies. No president has pushed the limits like Trump has and has crossed into illegality so frequently and without any checks on them.
Click to expand...

yeah, I remember spending a good chunk of the Obama and then Biden administrations warning the left they weren't going to like it when the right started to use the power they were building in the Executive Branch.

Welcome to the front door, of lobby, of the entry hallway, to the first level, of the superstadium of America's "Find Out" phase. It's gonna suck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom