To Protect and to Serve II

#13,326
#13,326
Rasputin_Vol said:
The MFers set foot on his property. They were trespassing.

Its amazing you cops talk that trespassing nonsense when it comes to a customer not wearing a mask but would belly ache and moan about a citizen shooting at people roaming around on his property.

It's like you guys have no level on discernment that makes logical sense.
Click to expand...
Shooting at people mowing the lawn you've abandoned is reasonable? What is a reasonable response to assault with a deadly weapon?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GreyWolf1129 and Rickyvol77
#13,328
#13,328
Rasputin_Vol said:
The MFers set foot on his property. They were trespassing.

Its amazing you cops talk that trespassing nonsense when it comes to a customer not wearing a mask but would belly ache and moan about a citizen shooting at people roaming around on his property.

It's like you guys have no level on discernment that makes logical sense.
Click to expand...
You can’t shoot at a city worker just because they are doing their job
 
#13,329
#13,329
Rasputin_Vol said:
Police don't have anything better to do than enforce a silly azz code violation. The tented windows of homeownership.

These cops will gladly come after your guns you sheep!
Click to expand...
Again they werent there For the codes enforcement, they were there for the nut job attempting to murder someone
 
#13,332
#13,332
Rasputin_Vol said:
Were they or were they not tresspassing?
Click to expand...
No, they weren't. They were there under provisions set forth under the law. It's the same for those that abandon properties they own. This is common practice, attempted murder isn't....... Or it shouldn't be anyway.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#13,335
#13,335
utvolpj said:
You're making the assumption that property ownership exists in this country
Click to expand...

Would you please just tell all of us where you are going with this thread so that we can focus on a single point to start?

Define your argument; make your point(s); take your position; and then let the debate begin. Good grief, you've gone from "Standoff with a single gunman over a code violation", to "the pic is the story", to "the ridiculous dress of the officers", to accusing me of changing the discussion and embarking on a crusade. And now it's about "assuming property ownership exists in this country"?

Hoss..please...you're bouncing around like a tennis ball in the dryer.

I don't mind having an intelligent discourse with you, but I need to know what we're focusing on. Is it the shooting, the uniforms, the law, or property ownership? Since the thread is "To Protect and Serve II", am I mistaken in the assumption that you have an issue with how Austin PD responded? If not, then let's start there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#13,336
#13,336
I think the point of this thread is to point out the failures of the police from the viewpoint of the common person.
PJ posted a pic of cops dressed as military seal team members and you and Ricky didn't like it. Until your profession starts treating people with respect and dignity, you're never going to get respect back from the public. You guys don't seem to get it.
 
#13,337
#13,337
VolStrom said:
I think the point of this thread is to point out the failures of the police from the viewpoint of the common person.
PJ posted a pic of cops dressed as military seal team members and you and Ricky didn't like it. Until your profession starts treating people with respect and dignity, you're never going to get respect back from the public. You guys don't seem to get it.
Click to expand...
I didn’t care how he posted other than the posters trying to make it appear that this nutjob was shot by police for his yard instead of him trying to kill innocent people
 
#13,338
#13,338
Rickyvol77 said:
I didn’t care how he posted other than the posters trying to make it appear that this nutjob was shot by police for his yard instead of him trying to kill innocent people
Click to expand...
You still don't get it do you? His ****ing grass was too tall and the end result was the police unloaded the military on him. This didn't need to happen.
 
#13,339
#13,339
VolStrom said:
You still don't get it do you? His ****ing grass was too tall and the end result was the police unloaded the military on him. This didn't need to happen.
Click to expand...
No his grass was tall and HE chose to attempt to kill a guy cutting grass. Only a nutjob would think that’s ok and normal behavior
 
#13,340
#13,340
VolStrom said:
You still don't get it do you? His ****ing grass was too tall and the end result was the police unloaded the military on him. This didn't need to happen.
Click to expand...
He shot at them. That is a felony. Had the police decided they would just look the other way and this guy shot some kid who went on his lawn then I would hold the police accountable. They have a guy shooting at innocent civilians. I don't care what they wear but they are tasked with dealing with the threat and taking him into custody. It appears they attempted to do that peacefully but he wasn't willing to talk.

Not picking a fight with you but what would you have had them do differently?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#13,341
#13,341
KB5252 said:
He shot at them. That is a felony. Had the police decided they would just look the other way and this guy shot some kid who went on his lawn then I would hold the police accountable. They have a guy shooting at innocent civilians. I don't care what they wear but they are tasked with dealing with the threat and taking him into custody. It appears they attempted to do that peacefully but he wasn't willing to talk.

Not picking a fight with you but what would you have had them do differently?
Click to expand...

Apparently, wear less confrontational attire.
 
#13,349
#13,349
Rasputin_Vol said:
Trespassers
Click to expand...
No, city workers doing their job tending to neglected properties that are abandoned/neglected. He lives in the city in close proximity to neighbors who are unreasonably affected.

If he wants to live as a recluse in an unkempt property he can move to a rural area and do so affecting no one. As it stands he chose to live in the city in a neighborhood where there are laws and expectations for basic care of said property. Hey was wrong in this case, he doubled down by attempting to assault someone with a deadly weapon. Whether you think it appropriate or not that is going to get a police response every time..... Rightfully so. And when you barricade yourself with firearms and refuse to communicate with the police that ups the response.

There are plenty of cases to point to and say this was needless, police were in the wrong....... This one ain't it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77 and OL SMOKEY
#13,350
#13,350
KB5252 said:
No, city workers doing their job tending to neglected properties that are abandoned/neglected. He lives in the city in close proximity to neighbors who are unreasonably affected.

If he wants to live as a recluse in an unkempt property he can move to a rural area and do so affecting no one. As it stands he chose to live in the city in a neighborhood where there are laws and expectations for basic care of said property. Hey was wrong in this case, he doubled down by attempting to assault someone with a deadly weapon. Whether you think it appropriate or not that is going to get a police response every time..... Rightfully so. And when you barricade yourself with firearms and refuse to communicate with the police that ups the response.

There are plenty of cases to point to and say this was needless, police were in the wrong....... This one ain't it.
Click to expand...
The response by the city for violating a petty azz ordinance was to trespass on his property with landscapers.

You guys unknowingly open the door to all kinds of govt intervention when you don't see anything wrong with this.

What happened to "my property, my choice"?
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top