1. New to the board or trying to figure out how something works here? Check out the User Guide.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Hot Topics is open from 8:30 AM - 4 PM ET Mon - Fri.

    Dismiss Notice
  3. The message board is closed between the hours of 4pm ET Friday and 8:30am ET Monday.
    As always, the Board will be open to read and those who have those privileges can still send private messages and post to Profiles.

The BLM Nevada thing

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Grandpa, Apr 14, 2014.

  1. Walter Oobleck

    Walter Oobleck keeps coming back...or going, and going, and going

    Funeral For Man Killed By BLM Agents « CBS Las Vegas

    We've been questioning the strong-arm, over-the-top actions of the BLM/government. Here's another case. A man died. There were eventually three heavily-armed agents of the government, one unarmed black man, and he is dead. They had to shoot him. Racist? We are unlikely to get the media digging into their past or following them around with cameras and tape recorders...but you have to ask the question: They couldn't have subdued this man without resorting to arms?

    When you carry a hammer, everything looks like a nail. In this case, a black man is dead at the hands of government agents. Part and parcel of the links provided in earlier posts detailing botched paramilitary raids, a number of them where innocents have died, a number of them where non-violent offenders have died. At the hands of government agents. At the hands of those sworn to serve and protect. Is it any wonder that Bundy called for friends and supporters to help defend against the warrior cops.?

    When I make a mistake in my job, I pay. Having read Radley Balko's expose on The Rise of the Warrior Cop, having seen the response from the government, detailed in Balko's book...denial, minimizing, excuses...I fear for Bundy. One could ask why racism is relevant to the conversation. Are Bundy's "crimes" more reprehensible because he used words incorrectly? Candidate Obama was/is a racist and a bigot--you cannot take his words about Christians who "cling to their guns and religion" any other way. The only reason we are hearing about alleged racism is because the establishment media is demonizing the man, as was done to Koresh, as was done to Randy Weaver, as has been done to countless others who ran counter to the government's wishes.

    The articles posted to present another side to the New York Times piece do illustrate that there was more to the story. But the point was to demonize Bundy and so any flavor that watered down the hatred the piece was intended to engender was left out. Slaves with weekends off are not free. I don't see the point of anyone suggesting entirely without proof that there are more green ones than yellow ones who receive subsidies. Bundy's point is that the subsidies deter them from seeking to improve their situation. Obama's policy to subsidize the wealthy white rich, who already have a hand up, do not need subsidies to improve their situation. On top of that, many of them failed, they went bankrupt. Obama's policy is itself racist. Why is he subsidizing the white rich people?
    Neesy and Lepplady like this.
  2. Grandpa

    Grandpa Well-Known Member

    Walter, you see a bridge between the Bundy/BLM issue, which started in 1992, and making name-calling anti-Obama statements. I don't, so we have different focus, and other than saying, "I don't have anything to say about that," I don't have anything else to say about that.

    Here's an interesting editorial by a conservative pundit for the Arizona Republic, Robert Robb. He makes some statements I don't agree with, such as his flippant and dismissive description of liberals (just as I would discount mirror-image flippant and dismissive descriptions of conservatives), but as a staunch conservative, he questions why in the world his colleagues on the right would support a scofflaw.

    I don't expect you, or anyone (including me), to engage in homework off-thread and away from the discussion, but you might like it. He even growls about immigration. "I don't know why populist conservatives have rallied behind Cliven Bundy, the Nevada rancher who is grazing cattle on federal land in defiance of federal court orders prohibiting it. Nor do I understand why the conservative commentariat, rather than forthrightly condemning the populist support, have tended to excuse or rationalize it." He goes on to inveigh against liberal hypocrisy and blind worship of the god of government, selective enforcement in immigration and health, and land policy.

    (So it's not just old-fart centrist (meaning sometimes liberal) types who don't understand the support.)
    jchanic, mjs9153 and Neesy like this.
  3. mjs9153

    mjs9153 Guest

    Walter you keep saying the stuff about warrior cops.. Well, I have been a cop since 1987, and I have been through many situations where people are barricaded or ready to kill anyone that comes close to them.. The first one that I remember was a guy with a shotgun and all I had was a six shot revolver.. Unfortunately, the ante has been raised and there are a lot of weapons out there.. used to be the people were satisfied with deer rifles and shotguns as weapons but now there are many people that carry easily reloaded heavy duty semi automatic rifles..very easy to second guess the guys who are trying to take people into custody without hurting them..trying to turn them into faceless government agents is crap,they are human beings and have feelings just like anyone.. Most police officers are doing their best to try and keep everybody safe, and none are just looking to kill or lock up innocent citizens.. You can believe that or not..
    Lepplady, guido tkp, Neesy and 3 others like this.
  4. Walter Oobleck

    Walter Oobleck keeps coming back...or going, and going, and going

    I don't appreciate the implication that my posts are meant to disparage our police forces. If you had taken the time to look at the map at the Cato Institute link you would have seen there are too many deaths at the hands of police. If you are serious about serving and protecting those you are charged with that duty, you might take a look at that link. The stories at the links do not say ANYTHING about a single cop going up against a single lone barricaded person. They detail the armed intrusion by teams of SWAT dressed for war.

    Why were BLM agents called to stop a man walking down the highway? (Link above in case you haven't bothered with that one, either.)
    Lepplady and Neesy like this.
  5. Neesy

    Neesy #1 fan (Annie Wilkes cousin) 1st cousin Mom's side

    Ooooh - you're a cop? I have a thing about cops - I just love 'em - we live three doors down from the Police station! :beguiled: :encouragement: :biggrin2:
    Lepplady and mjs9153 like this.
  6. mjs9153

    mjs9153 Guest

    The problem with statistics are that they can be skewed to read the way the author wants them to.. if you can't see that your repeated posts about "warrior cops" and heavily armed law enforcement agents,as if they are spoiling for confrontation, is disparaging then you are engaging in implausible deniability. Also,you were the one who brought up the lone officer thing,suggesting that Matt Dillon would end these conflicts all on his lonesome.. Well,things aren't as easily cut and dried as an old western TV show.The police are paid to preserve and maintain order,and it doesn't always come about easily or without casualties.. despite fictions like shooting a gun out of the bad guy's hand,for example. I don't know every in and out of the BLM situation, and I doubt you do either.Could be there were threats by the Bundy's or their supporters before the situation ever gained media attention..BTW..I am serious about serving and protecting the people I'm sworn to.. And I have the life-saving and other medals to attest to that..
  7. Walter Oobleck

    Walter Oobleck keeps coming back...or going, and going, and going

    Until you take the time to look at the map generated by the Cato Institute and the attached descriptions, there's not much point in discussing the issue. That you have not bothered with the link is obvious to me as I don't believe anyone in law enforcement would argue that the situations in which innocents have died is worth praise or defense. This is not about honest cops doing an honest day's work. The Matt Dillon post is half in jest, half serious. After you have looked at the deaths outlined at the link, get back to me. Until then, don't assume I am disparaging the honest cop who does an honest day's work. Here's the link again:
    Botched Paramilitary Police Raids | Cato Institute

    If you take the time to look at events, you will see that there is an increasing number of botched raids. If this troubling trend continues, there will be more innocent people killed by those sworn to serve and protect. Is that okay with you? These aren't "skewed statistics" and anyone who takes the time to look at the information provided at the link can make that determination. I can't force you to look at the information, but I can tell you that you are off-the-mark by focusing on one key phrase, "warrior cops," while neglecting to determine on your own whether that phrase has any merit. That you have chosen to ignore the information provided does not bode well for the opportunity to change the alarming trend outlined by the information from the Cato Institute.
    Neesy, Lepplady and jchanic like this.
  8. FlakeNoir

    FlakeNoir Original Kiwi© SKMB® Moderator

    Did you go through all of the different years on the chart Walt? Because although there are patches of large numbers here and there (1999 was particularly bad) the last few years have seemed to be trending down. 2011 had 6, there were none in 2012 (I'm assuming none in 2013 either because it's not listed) and so far only 1 in 2014.
    I'm not trying poke the hornets nest, it's just that it doesn't seem to me that the chart is representing an increasing trend.
    Neesy and Lepplady like this.
  9. Walter Oobleck

    Walter Oobleck keeps coming back...or going, and going, and going

    I've looked at the chart, isolated the various years, have clicked on the bubbles (not all), and have noted the smaller numbers for the years mentioned. I don't believe the absence of evidence can be used to argue that that is evidence of absence. The apparently decline in numbers could also be the result of statistics that have not as yet been compiled. The point of contention had been the use of the phrase "warrior cop". There is nothing in the other's posts to indicate the information from the Cato Institute had been viewed. I did try to count the number of deaths--at least 44 innocent Americans killed at the hands of those charged with serving and protecting. Another 25 non-violent offenders killed...again...presumably innocent until proven guilty, but subject to no-knock raids by men in full-battle gear, flash-bang grenades, fully-automatic weaponry, in the dead of night. There are another 30 police officers according to my count, killed during one of these raids. An yet each bubble does not define an event as a single individual killed--only that an innocent or a non-violent offender or a police had been killed. The numbers could be higher. And if if you look at the map at the date from which it starts, the continent is barren of death bubbles. When you click on the link, the initial map of the continent is peppered with death bubbles.

    And again, we have in Nevada the death of an innocent man at the hands of the BLM, a story that did not receive as much attention as the other.

    Too, it should be noted that the map at the Cato Institute link maps raids. It does not include some of the many other instances in which an innocent has been killed at the hands of law enforcement. The death of the man in Nevada, for instance, will not make this list, that happened this year.

    Radley Balko, in his book, The Rise of the Warrior Cop, chronicles the rise not only of the number of questionable raids--and they are questionable and worthy of discussion--but the rising number of SWAT teams, even in towns with populations as small as 50,000. He chronicles the rising number of SWAT responses to non-violent offenders, notes the death of innocents, and he remarks on a program in San Diego that was attempted to change the course of SWAT-only responses, a kind of public policing that was working--the statistics argued for that--but that method of policing was changed again in favor of SWAT-type responses. If someone wants to focus only on the expression warrior cop and not look at the evidence that begat that phrase, there's not much point in going any further with it. Until such time that people are willing to look at it as a potential problem, innocent people will continue to die at the hands of police.
    Neesy and Lepplady like this.
  10. jchanic

    jchanic Well-Known Member

    We had an incident here in Cleveland back in November. A policeman outside the Justice Center thought he heard a shot fired at him from an old Chevy Caprice. He radioed for help and more than 60 police cars responded, chasing the car into a neighboring city, where they finally stopped it in a school parking lot. More than 137 shots were fired into the car, killing both occupants. One officer fired more than 15 shots, meaning he had to reload his weapon. It was then determined that the occupants were unarmed--no gun was found--and that the car had a history of backfiring (which the officers of course did not know). Both occupants had criminal histories, and no-one knows why they fled.

    So far, the only action taken has been to discipline some of the police commanders for not following procedures. No policeman has been disciplined although investigations are being conducted.

    Whatever happened to "Get out of the car with your hands up"?

  11. hossenpepper

    hossenpepper Don't worry. I have a permit!!!

    Let me reiterate...

    We as a country had this very thing happen 3 years into George Washington's presidency... one of the founders; arguably the most respected of all. He certainly is held on the highest of pedestals by the conservative pundits. The same pundits who now criticize the governments response to this situation, where a guy refused to pay a tax because he doesn't recognize the interpretation of the government's powers to regulate and enforce such regulation. This is NO DIFFERENT WHATSOEVER than the Whiskey Rebellion. It is EXACTLY the same argument by the citizenry and the almost identical response from the feds. So how did this founder and first president handle it? He rode in front of the ARMY sent to PUT THE REBELLION DOWN. WITH FORCE IF NEEDED. So if you STILL have an issue with the response to this, then please, by all means berate Washington for setting the bar on responding to this sort of thing. Additionally, the primary organizers of the militia in the Whiskey rebellion were convicted of HIGH TREASON for their actions and sentence to hang. Washington recognized further violence and escalation of the matter wasn't prudent and pardoned them. In this modern case, the same response was put forth... stop the violent and aggressive behavior. Again, these situations are almost identical, except for the fancy outfits and powdered wigs (though maybe Bundy dresses up this way on Saturday nights).

    In other words, there is nothing else to discuss. Washington did this and we are here 220 years later and the jackboot men in black still haven't assimilated us into the new world order. The fears of this are silly and further discussion of how this should have played out are moot.

    The only thing that might make this story independently compelling is if the guy's first name was Al instead of Cliven.
    Neesy and guido tkp like this.
  12. hossenpepper

    hossenpepper Don't worry. I have a permit!!!

    Though I can see why you'd make that mistake with my level of knowledge of things and crystal clear logic... but no, I am not God. At least I don't think so.

    Not a rangent this time, but rather a complete and utter dismantling of the right wing argument on this one. Stupid historical facts about the founders and how they reacted to things! They are so incovenient to the neocon ideology.
    Neesy likes this.
  13. Walter Oobleck

    Walter Oobleck keeps coming back...or going, and going, and going

    And...in that War on Truth that I have mentioned in more than a few posts now...argues that the established leaders at the time of the Boston Tea Party put people in harm's way. Do we now use that as an example to uphold the alleged militia movement in Nevada? There is an example more recent, from Tennessee. The people took matters into their own hands and events are...documented in a book, although I can't find the title I'm looking for now. The Battle of Athens, Tennessee...just came to me. I've looked for a copy, but have been unable to acquire one.

    Ummmm, actually, it was the time when British troops fired on people on the green in...Boston was it? Argued in that book that...I forget...Sam Adams and Paul Revere?...argues that some of the big names from the time knew and wanted that result...British troops firing on civilians...argues it could have been avoided.
    Neesy and Lepplady like this.
  14. mjs9153

    mjs9153 Guest

    Not going to argue with you either Walter,as it appears you only wish to keep repeating phrases like warrior cops,and fully automatic weapons(which is incorrect,the rifles and handguns used by swat teams are semi auto) and trumpeting the book you want everyone to read..I get it,you dislike faceless agents of the govt and swat teams,as you mention this book at least four times in this thread.Not sure what you want to achieve here,other than fomenting hatred towards the govt and swat teams..only thing I will reiterate further is that the rules have changed since the old days.Seems that sometimes in the eighties,people decided they needed to buy guns used by military,and now there are a lot of them out there.If you think the police should still respond to serious incidents with a six shooter,well that is your opinion,but it isn't going to happen.
    Neesy and guido tkp like this.
  15. hossenpepper

    hossenpepper Don't worry. I have a permit!!!

    So you're saying that the Whiskey Rebellion and this, which again are IDENTICAL in almost every aspect, shouldn't be seen as HOW the founders would have responded to the same thing? Or that the founders were also conspirators in this great takeover of humanity?

    But on a more simple level... things could work out different in e very situation? Well, no kidding. That is a true statement about everything that's ever happened since the beginning of existence. But if you want to debate that the history of this country has been scripted by influence all along the way, then OK. You're right, it has. And so has every other society that's ever been. I already said that essentially when I said you're being paranoid about something over which you have ZERO control. Because if this rebellion and war you have eluded to does happen, the next *******s who take over afterwards will just do the same crap, because this stuff is true of every society in human existence ever. Because HUMANS are involved in HUMAN society and will do what HUMANS do.

    You and everyone else are completely and utterly powerless to stop this, influence this in any real way or avoid the control over the way we live our lives this has. You'd be better spending time shouting at the ground for having gravity or the sun for being warm. After all, isn't your entire argument that life IS being affected by all these people and their crap? Do you really think if everyone was like you that would change? LOL, not even close to possible or realistic!! The ONLY reason society works and advances AT ALL is because of the diversity of ideas and ways of living.

    So again, this fear and argument is beyond pointless. And it's the foundation of many a neocon's ideology. Thank you for showing a prime example of why that entire way of thinking is pretty much meaningless once you get past being very dutiful with accounting money.

    And no, this wasn't a rangent, because this is at the core of the conservative argument on this matter. :)
    Neesy, guido tkp and mjs9153 like this.
  16. Walter Oobleck

    Walter Oobleck keeps coming back...or going, and going, and going

    Again, you make an argument for me that I have not made. I can understand you not wanting to look at an issue where the police have killed innocent people. That is unfortunate because it augurs troubled times for all. Rather than attack me personally, which is what your post is, why not look at the evidence? I've asked you several times now. I'm not going to ask you again. If you continue I'll simply place you on ignore, as that is what you have done with the evidence I've presented here.
    Neesy and Lepplady like this.
  17. Jordan

    Jordan Webmaster-at-Large Administrator Moderator

    While there is definitely some demonstrable "militarization" of police forces nationwide (purchasing of military weaponry and vehicles is well documented), it's somewhat unavoidable. Less restrictions on firearms inherently raises the level of risk and necessary level of response from LEOs. Regardless of your views on the second amendment, that's a fact.

    There are a lot of parallels that can be made between The Whiskey Rebellion and the Bundy/BLM situation, but Bundy has less of a leg to stand on. With The Whiskey Rebellion, farmers were using their own grain to make whiskey. Bundy is using government-owned grass to make hamburger.
    Neesy, guido tkp, jchanic and 3 others like this.
  18. mjs9153

    mjs9153 Guest

    I haven't attacked anyone personally,I am responding to repeated posts which attempt to demonize the federal govt and the police.Period.If you refuse to accept that,fine with me.I don't have to read some book by someone with possibly ulterior motives(like selling their book to other like minded individuals)or reading possibly spurious statistics.Things aren't always as black and white as stats suggest,there are always shades of gray.Do what you have to do..
    Neesy and guido tkp like this.
  19. Walter Oobleck

    Walter Oobleck keeps coming back...or going, and going, and going

    Neesy likes this.
  20. Lepplady

    Lepplady Chillin' since 2006

    It's not cops that worry me. Most of them became cops to make a positive difference in the world and to protect people.
    What scares me are the people that give cops orders. The higher up the ladder you go, the more potential there is for crooked politics and greed.
    How many times in history have we seen good people do horrible things because they were "just following orders."
    If a cop is given an order to shoot into a crowd because he's told they're criminals, are they going to do it? Maybe. Without knowing one way or another if it's true or not. They're just following orders.
    It's not the cops that scare me. It's the potential for abuse of power from the guys that give the orders.

Share This Page

Sleeping Beauties - Available Now