The George Floyd Monument

[Wireless1]

If someone busted down your door in the middle of the night and you had no idea who it was, what would you do? Damn right I'd open fire to protect my loved ones. That's why no one blames him.

And how many parents have killed their own children because they did not identify the threat before open fire? There is no evidence the police hid their identities.

 

[Wireless1]

Also, the fact that the BF was absolved of all charges, even shooting a police officer, speaks volumes to me. Yes, some will argue it was done to appease the public. But IMO, if there weren't so many holes in the police's story, the DA wouldn't hesitate to charge him.

How many protesters did the DA press charges against? The DA's decisions were more based on the powder keg than the law....and I'm not saying in this case that's a bad thing after looking at what happened in other cities.

 

[1vol8]

I see you read your own posts.

Hey man. Just wanted to say it was great debating with you last night. We obviously disagree but you’re very level headed and kept it classy. #respect

 

[1vol8]

I don't give a **** if you are purple. No knock warrants are a violation to the Constitution. Period.

You’re right. But if we’re being truthful, so is telling a criminal he can’t have a gun. The second amendment reads. “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. Nowhere in those words does it exclude anyone based on age or conduct. That being said it’s easy to understand why certain amendments needed to be “tweaked” one way or the other to fit within society. No knock warrants are necessary in certain cases and a judge felt this was one of them. I don’t see the violation tbh because it met every element of the 4th. The search was not unreasonable. They had probable cause, oath and knew exactly where they were going and what they were after. What makes it a bad look isn’t the no knock. It’s the fact that they didn’t find what they were looking for.

 

[hog88]

You’re right. But if we’re being truthful, so is telling a criminal he can’t have a gun. The second amendment reads. “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. Nowhere in those words does it exclude anyone based on age or conduct. That being said it’s easy to understand why certain amendments needed to be “tweaked” one way or the other to fit within society. No knock warrants are necessary in certain cases and a judge felt this was one of them. I don’t see the violation tbh because it met every element of the 4th. The search was not unreasonable. They had probable cause, oath and knew exactly where they were going and what they were after. What makes it a bad look isn’t the no knock. It’s the fact that they didn’t find what they were looking for. View attachment 377006

I 100% disagree that "it’s easy to understand why certain amendments needed to be “tweaked” one way or the other to fit within society". You sound like Luther in that quote. If you want to "tweak" the constitution do it the right way and go through the amendment process.

There is zero need for no-knock warrants, police have always had the authority to enter a dwelling if there is probable cause to believe a life is in danger. All a no-knock warrant gives them is the ability to surprise a suspect and preserve evidence. They are not worth the risk to the civilian or LEO lives. As for felons owning firearms, all civil rights should be restored immediately once a persons sentence has been completed.

 

[NEO]

I could not disagree more. The more attention on disproportionate treatment, the better.

Austin is doing quite fine.
Austin Cuts Police Budget By A Third As Defunding Efforts Gain Momentum
Crime is up everywhere because of COVID.
The more people that move into a city the more likely it is to turn blue btw.

Austin is not doing fine now.

The citizens are furious about the changes.

The fact is the poor areas have had a huge uptick in crime and it's not the pandemic. That's a cop out.

It's because they know they can commit a crime and even if they are caught they are released without bail. The local officials have basically made it ok to break the law.

 

[1vol8]

I 100% disagree that "it’s easy to understand why certain amendments needed to be “tweaked” one way or the other to fit within society". You sound like Luther in that quote. If you want to "tweak" the constitution do it the right way and go through the amendment process.

There is zero need for no-knock warrants, police have always had the authority to enter a dwelling if there is probable cause to believe a life is in danger. All a no-knock warrant gives them is the ability to surprise a suspect and preserve evidence. They are not worth the risk to the civilian or LEO lives. As for felons owning firearms, all civil rights should be restored immediately once a persons sentence has been completed.

I personally agree with no need to tweak anything. But I also understand why. I think kids should be educated on guns from the time they’re physically able handle one if they’re going to be living with them. But that choice is up to the parents. I believe a kid should be able to purchase a gun with his/her own money under parental supervision if they’re under 18 and free to do so without supervision thereafter. And I also agree your rights should be restored no matter your conviction once your punishment is served. My point is our rights are already being infringed upon and a legitimate argument can be made as to why. A 5 yr old with a Glock in his hands at Publix doesnt exactly make me comfortable but constitutionality speaking he/she has the right to have one. Lawfully speaking I understand the restrictions based solely on maturity level. All that being said, this isn’t a subject I’ve fully thought out so my opinions could definitely change.

We can agree to disagree on no knock warrants. They’re not granted very often at all believe it or not and IMO shouldn’t have been granted in Breonnas case because the goal was simply to preserve evidence. There was no reason that I know of to assume anyone’s life would’ve been in jeopardy at that location. But the judge felt otherwise. No matter where you stand on no knock warrants they’re not a violation of the constitution if all the requirements are met. In Breonnas case, they were.

 

[zeppelin128]

You’re right. But if we’re being truthful, so is telling a criminal he can’t have a gun. The second amendment reads. “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. Nowhere in those words does it exclude anyone based on age or conduct. That being said it’s easy to understand why certain amendments needed to be “tweaked” one way or the other to fit within society. No knock warrants are necessary in certain cases and a judge felt this was one of them. I don’t see the violation tbh because it met every element of the 4th. The search was not unreasonable. They had probable cause, oath and knew exactly where they were going and what they were after. What makes it a bad look isn’t the no knock. It’s the fact that they didn’t find what they were looking for. View attachment 377006

I give you props for participating in the thread, but you are 100000% wrong on this. The fourth is still a thing. Drop a warrant, or go **** yourself.

 

[zeppelin128]

I 100% disagree that "it’s easy to understand why certain amendments needed to be “tweaked” one way or the other to fit within society". You sound like Luther in that quote. If you want to "tweak" the constitution do it the right way and go through the amendment process.

There is zero need for no-knock warrants, police have always had the authority to enter a dwelling if there is probable cause to believe a life is in danger. All a no-knock warrant gives them is the ability to surprise a suspect and preserve evidence. They are not worth the risk to the civilian or LEO lives. As for felons owning firearms, all civil rights should be restored immediately once a persons sentence has been completed.

This all damn day.

 

[1vol8]

I give you props for participating in the thread, but you are 100000% wrong on this. The fourth is still a thing. Drop a warrant, or go **** yourself.

I know the 4th is a thing. If you’re paying attention to my post you’ll see I’m not defending anything other than the exact words of the 4th. If you’re claiming a violation of it then I’m asking where it is. No need to get snippy if you can’t answer my question.

 

[zeppelin128]

No-knock warrants are ********. And if a person has served their time, they should absolutely with out question enjoy the rights the rest of us have. No-knock warrants are a violation of the Constitution.

 

[1vol8]

No-knock warrants are ********. And if a person has served their time, they should absolutely with out question enjoy the rights the rest of us have. No-knock warrants are a violation of the Constitution.

I posted the 4th amendment for you to study to the letter. If you can’t look at the 4th amendment and point out where they violated, you’ve already lost this debate in a conservative court room. What they did was not unconstitutional. What you’re doing now is exactly what I was talking about in my “tweaking” comment. You’re “tweaking” based on personal feelings and I’m not arguing that you’re wrong on that.

 

[C-south]

I give you props for participating in the thread, but you are 100000% wrong on this. The fourth is still a thing. Drop a warrant, or go **** yourself.

Illegal searches and seizures are only illegal until they’re made legal.

 

[zeppelin128]

Illegal searches and seizures are only illegal until they’re made legal.

Illegal searches should be illegal.

 

[1vol8]

Illegal searches should be illegal.

Illegal searches are illegal. Have been since 1776 as pointed out in previous posts.

 

[KB5252]

How do you know this?? It probably would have saved us another century-plus from the type of ignorance I constantly read on this board

Because some elements of the Confederacy, were contemplating a guerilla war. The Union knew this and was a significant reason for them being gracious to Confederate leadership post war. Had they not been what option do you believe there would have been for Confederate leaders?

I'm no civil war expert but I know enough about it and human nature to understand what not accepting the South back into the country gracefully would have meant..... Everything I mentioned before would have absolutely come to fruition.

 

[hog88]

I posted the 4th amendment for you to study to the letter. If you can’t look at the 4th amendment and point out where they violated, you’ve already lost this debate in a conservative court room. What they did was not unconstitutional. What you’re doing now is exactly what I was talking about in my “tweaking” comment. You’re “tweaking” based on personal feelings and I’m not arguing that you’re wrong on that.

I agree that per previous court rulings no-knocks are constitutional but like many other things that's another item the courts got wrong. No-knocks SHOULD be illegal. They serve no purpose.

 

[1vol8]

I agree that per previous court rulings no-knocks are constitutional but like many other things that's another item the courts got wrong. No-knocks SHOULD be illegal. They serve no purpose.

Should be illegal and unconstitutional are two separate issues. What I’m debating is someone that claimed it to be unconstitutional. I happen to disagree in certain situations on no knocks but only because in certain situations the element of surprise can mean the difference in life and death to the officers. However in the Taylor case, I agree it shouldn’t have been granted.

 

[hog88]

Should be illegal and unconstitutional are two separate issues. What I’m debating is someone that claimed it to be unconstitutional. I happen to disagree in certain situations on no knocks but only because in certain situations the element of surprise can mean the difference in life and death to the officers. However in the Taylor case, I agree it shouldn’t have been granted.

Illegal/unconstitutional = same thing in this discussion.

As for the safety of the officers I think no-knocks put the officers in much greater danger. If someone comes busting through my door in the middle of the night shouting police, Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny I'm sending lead in their direction. Again I say that there is no reason outside of a person being in imminent danger (which doesn't require a warrant) a no-knock is needed.

 

[1vol8]

Illegal/unconstitutional = same thing in this discussion.

As for the safety of the officers I think no-knocks put the officers in much greater danger. If someone comes busting through my door in the middle of the night shouting police, Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny I'm sending lead in their direction. Again I say that there is no reason outside of a person being in imminent danger (which doesn't require a warrant) a no-knock is needed.

Illegal and unconstitutional is not equal in this conversation because a no knock (no matter how you view them) is not either of the two. As of right now they are not illegal if the requirements are met and they’ve never been unconstitutional. Should they be is another conversation and based on personal opinion. We’re debating what’s written in black and white since 1776.

As for the way you feel about them, I understand. However I’ll give you the same question I asked weezer last night. If you were a SWAT officer and you knew your job was to be first through the door of a known cop killer, would you rather have the element of surprise or give them the opportunity to ready themselves for engaging you?

 

[hog88]

Illegal and unconstitutional is not equal in this conversation because a no knock (no matter how you view them) is not either of the two. As of right now they are not illegal if the requirements are met and they’ve never been unconstitutional. Should they be is another conversation and based on personal opinion. We’re debating what’s written in black and white since 1776.

As for the way you feel about them, I understand. However I’ll give you the same question I asked weezer last night. If you were a SWAT officer and you knew your job was to be first through the door of a known cop killer, would you rather have the element of surprise or give them the opportunity to ready themselves for engaging you?

Or option 3: Surround the building and wait them out. Everybody's gotta eat.

 

[1vol8]

Or option 3: Surround the building and wait them out. Everybody's gotta eat.

Lol. That’s an option at a house but not a third floor apartment building. These are little things the average person doesn’t think about. One reason cops bust in is to protect the public from stray bullets should they go to flying. A close quarter gunfight = more accurately placed shots at the intended target. Where as a gunfight from 25 + yards = more chance of missing the target and more liability.

You only have two options. Knock or no knock and it’s you going in first. What’s your choice?

 

[hog88]

Lol. That’s an option at a house but not a third floor apartment building. These are little things the average person doesn’t think about. One reason cops bust in is to protect the public from stray bullets should they go to flying. A close quarter gunfight = more accurately placed shots at the intended target. Where as a gunfight from 25 + yards = more chance of missing the target and more liability.

You only have two options. Knock or no knock and it’s you going in first. What’s your choice?

Why isn't it an option in an apartment building? Evacuate the neighbors and where are they going to go? Jump off the balcony?

The best way to win a gunfight is to not get into one.

 

[utvolpj]

Unintentionally providing perfect examples of the need for smarter policing

"But when we initiate the gun fight..." isn't a good reason for doing things a certain way

 

[1vol8]

Why isn't it an option in an apartment building? Evacuate the neighbors and where are they going to go? Jump off the balcony?

The best way to win a gunfight is to not get into one.

Idk if you’ve ever lived in an apartment building but there are several reasons. One being a greater distance of engagement. Second, you can hear the knock on everyone’s door to evacuate them and therefore allowing even more time to prepare. Third is pedestrians, curious onlookers and the people you just evacuated. Now they’re all outside standing and watching from the patrol car barricade. Not to mention some of them being kids. I can keep going but I’m sure you understand