Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threats

[fmw]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

O I enjoy you Americans and your crazy gun laws, and the great shooting spectacles you put on for the world to see, keep it up as know you will, your second amendment will see to that

I thought the attack on the night club in Paris was even more of a spectacle. The one in Belgium wasn't too bad either.

 

[haymarket]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

bringing a rifle to a public demonstration is simply stupid trying to show you are a member of the big dick club. Such folks hurt the cause of gun ownership.

 

[manise]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

"Suspect" and "person of interest" are the same thing... someone they think may be involved.

Police use "person of interest" to include possible witnesses and the actual criminal. Suspect is more specific; someone they think committed the crime.

 

[jimbo]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

They dealt with one individual, and messed it up.
I was not criticizing his right.
Just that as we have seen before many exercising their 2 A Rights, this could have turned into a real **** show.
Did it not happen in Ferguson?? Cannot recall.

What diud they mess up? They were looking for shooters with rifles. They found a shooter with a rifle. They investigated. They cleared and released.

 

[jimbo]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

He was on video being arrested. Most gentle with them they were.

Unfortunate. He did nothing wrong. Was it SMART to bring a rifle to a peaceful demonstration? Uh, no. Looked like he was wearing a bullet proof vest as well. Not sure about that. What's legal and what's prudent are often two very different things.

The thing is, what's legal is always legal. What's prudent is often a matter of opinion.

 

[jimbo]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

Body armor only protects the torso. The legs, arms, neck and head are totally exposed. In a situation like this a kill shot wouldn't be necessary. A wounding shot (legs, feet, hands, arms) would suffice. Taking away his ability to engage is all that is necessary.

I'd bet the police had vests, and those vests would stop a .223. Yet 5 dead, 5 more wounded. 2 collateral damage. This killer, a combat marine, was not your average shooter or crowd sprayer.

 

[jimbo]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

Police use "person of interest" to include possible witnesses and the actual criminal. Suspect is more specific; someone they think committed the crime.

The minutes after the shooting I would imagine the police had better things to do than worrying about public opinion. If there is any fault in the police action, it would be holding a press conference too soon after the shooting. A lot of misinformation went out. But, if anything, it's a minor point.

 

[apdst]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

I'd bet the police had vests, and those vests would stop a .223. Yet 5 dead, 5 more wounded. 2 collateral damage. This killer, a combat marine, was not your average shooter or crowd sprayer.

He was a carpenter in the Army Reserve, but he obviously done done his homework.

 

[PirateMk1]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

Perhaps so but I'm not sure taking a rifle to a protest is not "as a law abiding citizen should do." Can do, yes. should do, probably not.

Its his right and he went out of his way to cooperate with the police. They at the very least ought to make very clear to the public at large he is not a suspect or perpetrator.

 

[Hatuey]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

If you dont understand the difference, I cant help you. I dont know anything about you, obviously, but I sincerely hope you are not raising any young men to adulthood. They may not make it.

If you can't explain the difference, then how do you know there is one? I'm waiting for you to tell me the difference between thousands exercising their rights in a peaceful manner, and a handful exercising their right in the same way.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

Either she knew what she was doing is illegal, or she's too stupid to be Secretary of State, much less President.

"Washington has still not heeded two decades of warnings that the best way to protect America’s biggest secrets is to have far fewer of them and to recognize that much of what is stamped “secret” today is widely available on the Internet."

"But the White House has had less success redefining what should be classified. A 2008 report by the director of national intelligence acknowledged, “The definitions of ‘national security’ and what constitutes ‘intelligence’ — and thus what must be classified — are unclear.”"

"
“The incentives to classify information are many, and the incentives to refrain from classifying it are few,” he noted recently, adding that he was speaking just for himself. “Classifying information doesn’t incur any monetary cost for the classifier, and any economist will tell you that a free good will be overused.”"

A Washington Riddle: What Is ‘Top Secret’? - NYTimes.com

 

[Deuce]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

It's called, "superior firepower".

What, the police didn't have superior firepower?

Do you understand the concept of, "fire and maneuver"? Johnson had obviously reconed the kill zone. He had already selected firing positions, based on his guess of how the police would react when he started firing and moved from one position to the next, ending up in the ground floor, where he hoped to make his escape in the mayhem. He obviously chose a place where he would be less likely to be observed and even less likely to be engaged with counter fire. Had there been friendly elements that he believed would not only observe his position, but also engage him with counter fire it could have deterred him from attacking at all. You can bet your ass that the police departments around the country won't make the same mistake, twice. The next time there's a rally, the area will be observed from every possible angle, possible firing positions will be occupied, or at least be under observation where counter fire can be brought to bear. Next time, there will be, or should be, massive fire superority in the projected kill zone, so as to kill, or supress a shooter within 15 seconds of the first round being fired.

Sheer masturbation fantasy. The random civilians wouldn't be in any better position to pull off your call of duty dream than the police. You're expecting people in a loud, angry crowd to isolate and return fire at a concealed sniper without also killing each other or getting gunned down by the police. So, a crowd of civilians all start whirling around and firing into nearby buildings for the sniper. What do the police see now?

They see a bunch of angry protestors shooting up buildings full of civilians. Bloodbath ensues.

Or, maybe one of your 2nd amendment good guys is ex-military with counter-sniper experience. He is faster on the draw and rapidly identifies the shooter's position. So he starts returning fire first. Now we've got one guy in a crowd firing at a building. What percentage of the other armed protestors are going to correctly identify him as a "good guy?" What percentage of the police are going to do the same? Is it 100%? No, it isn't. And anything less than 100% means Good Guy With A Gun gets lit the **** up himself. Bloodbath again.

If the police start applying warfare logic to something that isn't a war, they're going to **** it up badly. Or worse: actually start a war.

 

[apdst]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

What, the police didn't have superior firepower?



Sheer masturbation fantasy. The random civilians wouldn't be in any better position to pull off your call of duty dream than the police. You're expecting people in a loud, angry crowd to isolate and return fire at a concealed sniper without also killing each other or getting gunned down by the police. So, a crowd of civilians all start whirling around and firing into nearby buildings for the sniper. What do the police see now?

They see a bunch of angry protestors shooting up buildings full of civilians.

At first they didn't. The gained superiority, but only after Johnson had shot 11 people.

Another solution would be to ban rallies in a built up area. The protest enabled this attack by creating a target rich environment in a concentrated area. It was ripe for an ambush.

 

[Grand Mal]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

At first they didn't. The gained superiority, but only after Johnson had shot 11 people.

Another solution would be to ban rallies in a built up area. The protest enabled this attack by creating a target rich environment in a concentrated area. It was ripe for an ambush.

Do you consider that a viable option?

 

[apdst]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

Do you consider that a viable option?

I consider it a viable option to restrict the rallies to a location that isn't a perfect environment for a sniper attack. Its all about safety, yes?

 

[Deuce]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

I consider it a viable option to restrict the rallies to a location that isn't a perfect environment for a sniper attack. Its all about safety, yes?

Take away every gun in America. It's all about safety, yes?

 

[Grand Mal]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

I consider it a viable option to restrict the rallies to a location that isn't a perfect environment for a sniper attack. Its all about safety, yes?

No, it's not. It's about government control, personal rights and freedoms, too much power in the hands of the police, too many laws, a lot of stuff that you apparently need to be liberal to understand.
From a conservative point of view, it's about the stern-but-fair Daddy state, the stronger the better.

 

[manise]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

Another solution would be to ban rallies in a built up area. The protest enabled this attack by creating a target rich environment in a concentrated area. It was ripe for an ambush.

And of course those "target rich environments" happen to be in big cities where most protests in America take place. That's convenient. No, the right to free speech doesn't only exist for Peoria and smaller towns. Inner city police departments will have to secure "built up areas" as they do for visiting dignitaries.

 

[RetiredUSN]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

I consider it a viable option to restrict the rallies to a location that isn't a perfect environment for a sniper attack. Its all about safety, yes?

There is no such thing as a secure area when snipers are in involved.

 

[apdst]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

There is no such thing as a secure area when snipers are in involved.

True, but some areas are safer than others.

 

[apdst]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

And of course those "target rich environments" happen to be in big cities where most protests in America take place. That's convenient. No, the right to free speech doesn't only exist for Peoria and smaller towns. Inner city police departments will have to secure "built up areas" as they do for visiting dignitaries.

Ok, the right to keep and bears arms should be equally protected.

 

[radcen]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

Show how.

Here's an aspect that goes both ways. She could show how, and you could show now not. Are you up for it?

 

[manise]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

Ok, the right to keep and bears arms should be equally protected.

The 2nd Amendment allows for keeping and bearing arms. It also allows for reasonable gun control. Same for the 1st Amendment. People have the right to peacefully demonstrate in their cities but the government can limit the streets and time as security dictates. No constitutional right is absolute.

 

[apdst]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

No, it's not. It's about government control, personal rights and freedoms, too much power in the hands of the police, too many laws, a lot of stuff that you apparently need to be liberal to understand.
From a conservative point of view, it's about the stern-but-fair Daddy state, the stronger the better.

It isn't Conservatives that are trying to restrict gun rights. Don't even try pinning the nanny state on the Conservatives...lol.

 

[apdst]

Re: Man falsely connected to the shooting by Dallas police is now getting death threa

The 2nd Amendment allows for keeping and bearing arms. It also allows for reasonable gun control. Same for the 1st Amendment. People have the right to peacefully demonstrate in their cities but the government can limit the streets and time as security dictates. No constitutional right is absolute.

The 1st Amendment allows freedom assembly. It doesn't guarantee the location of that assembly. See how that works?