terrorist kills Minnesota lawmaker

#327
#327
McDad said:
a mob surrounding a car doesn't have to be dangerous. If I were driving down Cumberland after a Vol football game, I wouldn't be worried. If I am driving and an angry mob surrounds me and starts beating on windows, etc there is a huge level of concern.
Click to expand...
Stop yelling Row Tide and they'll leave you alone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol, Orange_Crush and KB5252
#329
#329
McDad said:
"The people" need to decide if there is a manifesto or not?
Click to expand...
no, the issue here is the police at first (June 15) said there was a manifesto then the next day said there was no manifesto.

A different issue is 'IF' there was a manifesto do "the people" have a right to see it. The Nashville shooter had a manifesto and the police tried to keep it from the public. In cases where there are manifestos do 'the people' have a right to see it?
 
#330
#330
jmacvols1 said:
no, the issue here is the police at first (June 15) said there was a manifesto then the next day said there was no manifesto.

A different issue is 'IF' there was a manifesto do "the people" have a right to see it. The Nashville shooter had a manifesto and the police tried to keep it from the public. In cases where there are manifestos do 'the people' have a right to see it?
Click to expand...
I understand there are conflicting statements. What i don't understand is what 'the people' gain by seeing a manifesto and what difference it makes to the judicial future of the assassin?
 
#333
#333
McDad said:
I understand there are conflicting statements. What i don't understand is what 'the people' gain by seeing a manifesto and what difference it makes to the judicial future of the assassin?
Click to expand...
people may or may not gain something from reading a manifesto but do people have a right to at least see it and read it...probably so.
 
#335
#335
McDad said:
Why would we have a right? We don't have a right to see other items of evidence in a murder investigation do we?
Click to expand...
Not until the trial is over. And even then some evidence may be restricted.
 
#338
#338
OrangeTsar said:
But my car engine isn’t „bro“.
Self defense is among humanity‘s oldest recognized rights. You sit there surrounded and be dragged out of your car and be beaten by your erstwhile Gaza bros and Antifa goons if you wish. I prefer not to.
Poor weak me 🙄
Click to expand...

You supposed to just sit there and take it while they potentially batter on your car and strike fear in your family. Then if your car is damaged so what it's just car damages. Just file a claim and insurance will pay for it. So what if your premium go up. If you can afford to drive, then you must have the money. Even worse if a family member gets hurt, then accept it rationally that it was for the greater good.
 
#340
#340
Orange_Crush said:
Make up your mind. Was it the city burning that you originally quoted? Peaceful protests? Or big money?


I think I may be able to help. He said it was feedback from the industry leaders (i.e. money).
Click to expand...
deleted, not going to derail the thread
 
Last edited:
#341
#341
LouderVol said:
that was never my stance. once again you just made up a position for me instead of only reading the words that I typed.

you asked what could make Americans change their stance. I pointed to Trump changing his stance. and then somehow you drug in burning cities, skipping right over Trump changing his stance.
Click to expand...
Rich. You should probably reread the interaction and reset.

I posted about the opinions of the average US citizens and you replied with comments about Trump's opinion, as though that was the conversation at hand. It was a post about the actions of rioters waving foreign flags and you replied with comments about industry leaders and/or supposedly peaceful immigrant workers.

And now project the above. Again. Rich.

Let's not mention that you seemed to question why Trump would change his opinion, attribute possibilities why he changed his opinion, and also post a reference to him stating the reason why he apparently changed his opinion--again, as a response to a tongue in cheek comment about not-Trump and not-ag-workers.
 
Last edited:
#342
#342
McDad said:
understood. That's why you may notice the words 'murder investigation' in my post.
Click to expand...

I get that.

I take the stance that unless the evidence could taint a jury pool (and in fairness, a manifesto might do just that), the authorities might as well make it public.
 
#343
#343
McDad said:
understood. That's why you may notice the words 'murder investigation' in my post.
Click to expand...
My issue is more with why release some and not all...seems like playing politics and if that's the case release everything and let the public make their own minds. Other wise we are force fed whatever narrative they want. Chauvin is a great example...that case was decided long before the autopsy proved od and heart attack brought on by restriction by chauvin per his MPD training. But regardless of facts he was going to be guilty of murder because of the way the media released info to the public.
 
#344
#344
bamawriter said:
I get that.

I take the stance that unless the evidence could taint a jury pool (and in fairness, a manifesto might do just that), the authorities might as well make it public.
Click to expand...
How would you benefit from accessing it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11
#345
#345
whodeycin85 said:
My issue is more with why release some and not all...seems like playing politics and if that's the case release everything and let the public make their own minds. Other wise we are force fed whatever narrative they want. Chauvin is a great example...that case was decided long before the autopsy proved od and heart attack brought on by restriction by chauvin per his MPD training. But regardless of facts he was going to be guilty of murder because of the way the media released info to the public.
Click to expand...
I comprehend what you wrote. I am incapable of finding the words needed for a proper reply.
 
#347
#347
K-town Vol Fan said:
If they should be outraged and pin it in the Dems or try to get him pardoned if he's on their side.
Click to expand...
No doubt several are wanting to know his politics. I think some just want to try to understand what motivates someone to do such things.

Neither are going to make anyone's life any better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11
#348
#348
Orange_Crush said:
And why reward a murderer by publishing it?
Click to expand...
I'm sure there are also more than a few crazy people out there that are considering doing something similar (murder) and the release and contents of a manifesto might be enough to push them over the edge. At the end of the day this dude is a killer and is going to rot in prison or be put to death, his motives really don't matter, nor should they.
 
#349
#349
K-town Vol Fan said:
I'm sure there are also more than a few crazy people out there that are considering doing something similar (murder) and the release and contents of a manifesto might be enough to push them over the edge
Click to expand...
With that train of thought there are several books, movies and tv shows which should be banned. I don't think we want to go down that path.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, Smallvol#1, K-town Vol Fan and 1 other person
#350
#350
Orange_Crush said:
So you are presenting the possibility that @C-south wasn't having murder fantasies about killing protesters in the street that aren't surrounding cars and threatening people, even though the context was escaping people who are surrounding his car and threatening him?

As much as I like you as a poster, you go a bridge too far to be taken seriously this time.
Click to expand...
„Bridge too far“? That is actually quite a clever tie in to the picture. I sincerely salute excellent rhetorical skill 🫡
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland and Orange_Crush
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top