Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 52

Thread: Federal air marshal rapes woman in Seattle

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kirkland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    121

    Post imported post

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/04/22...t+Headlines%29

    "A federal air marshal has been charged with raping a female escort at gunpoint in a Seattle airport hotel [...] accused of using his position as a law enforcement officer to coerce the escort — and of using his government-issued firearm to threaten her"

    Yet the antis and libtards blindly accept that as soon as someone becomes "law enforcement" he is immediately endowed with zen-like mastery of safe and responsible use of firearms. (Where's that "libtards make me sick" emoticon?)


  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,666

    Post imported post

    Sorry, I did see this and see no purpose on the OCDO website.
    Live Free or Die!

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    1. What is the OC/gun-rights angle?

    2. We have liberal forum members who respect police. Best to tighten up the statements so they are not so generalized. All generalizations are bad.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Post imported post

    Let the LE bashing begin in

    5..

    4..

    3..

    2..

    1..

  5. #5
    Regular Member swatspyder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    University Place, Washington, USA
    Posts
    573

    Post imported post

    IBTL :celebrate

  6. #6
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278

    Post imported post

    tai4de2 wrote:
    Yet the antis and libtards blindly accept that as soon as someone becomes "law enforcement" he is immediately endowed with zen-like mastery of safe and responsible use of firearms. (Where's that "libtards make me sick" emoticon?)
    I have never read(e) any "libtards" (as you call them) say anything about LEO's being endowed with anything. I am a liberal *shivers* and do not have that view.

    If the Marshal did in fact do this he deserves to be found guilty and thrown into prison for being a POS rapist.

    Maybe you posted this because the Marshal used a handgun? Yes, Marshals have handguns.

    I am trying to figurre out how to make this gun related but I just can't seem to. I have a number of friends that are "prostitutes." Definately a dangerous line of work. I always encourage them to carry pepperspray.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  7. #7
    Regular Member Machoduck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Covington, WA & Keenesburg, CO
    Posts
    566

    Post imported post


    Sylvia, it's generally perceived that liberals are for gun control. Within gun control it's generally perceived that liberals are fine with cops having guns. Some cops believe this but not many. Those cops who do are called "only ones" because they're the only ones capable of safely handling firearms. This is a retarded viewpoint. Thus the term, in this context, "libtards"

    Keep and bear arms, which is a great place to get lots of current gun news, posts links to a series of articles, including police misadventures. They don't do this to bash police, they do it to show just how imperfect some cops are, thus lack of practical logic in the (dare I say it?) libtard thinking.

    MD

    http://www.keepandbeararms.com/

    ETA: This is how I took it. I have no special dispension from Tai4de2 to speak for him.

  8. #8
    Regular Member killchain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Richland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    788

    Post imported post

    tai4de2 wrote:
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/04/22...t+Headlines%29

    "A federal air marshal has been charged with raping a female escort at gunpoint in a Seattle airport hotel [...] accused of using his position as a law enforcement officer to coerce the escort — and of using his government-issued firearm to threaten her"

    Yet the antis and libtards blindly accept that as soon as someone becomes "law enforcement" he is immediately endowed with zen-like mastery of safe and responsible use of firearms. (Where's that "libtards make me sick" emoticon?)
    This has no purpose being on this forum. This has nothing to do with open carry in Washington State.

    And I am neither an anti nor a "libtard" (I'm assuming you're talking about "Liberal Democrat") but I support the police. Not every apple you harvest is going to be good.
    "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." -John Stuart Mill

  9. #9
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    tai4de2 wrote:
    Yet the antis and libtards blindly accept that as soon as someone becomes "law enforcement" he is immediately endowed with zen-like mastery of safe and responsible use of firearms. (Where's that "libtards make me sick" emoticon?)
    This conclusion seems suspect to me.

    You're being careful by not bashing the LEO, just flatly reporting the rape charge event. You know that OCDO prohibits LEO bashing...

    But you want to use the news report of the rape charge to concoct a bashing against "antis and libtards" for some realllllly strained rationale.

    The "antis and libtards" have plenty of attributes that can be criticized, and effectively. Your case is....weak. Very weak.

    Where's the failed strawman argument emoticon?

    Oh, here, I'll use this...



  10. #10
    Regular Member Tomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    University Place, Washington, USA
    Posts
    705

    Post imported post

    As a Vietnam Vet who has carried legally for over 40 years, and who believes in and tries to advance the RKBA, I object to being called names.

    I tend to be more toward the liberal side than the conservative side of many discussions.

    Just because some of a person's beliefs are liberal or conservative does not (or at least SHOULD not) mean that all their views blindly fall into some obvious line.

    I respectfully request that the name calling be left at the door.

    (Other than that, "why is this thread here?")
    No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: The officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets. -- Edward Abbey

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Facimus!

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kirkland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    121

    Post imported post

    Wow, you people are overly sensitive.

    I am not bashing LEO. I am simply pointing to a story that contradicts one of the standard talking points of the antis -- namely, that law enforcement are a special class of citizens who can be trusted with firearms whereas the rest of us cannot. Is anyone here seriously going to try to say that this is not a standard anti talking point?

    If a person holds that view, he is a libtard. Don't try to read anything more into it -- in particular I am making no attempt to correlate any other views or behavior with libtardedness.

    I agree that this could have happened anywhere in the USA but it happened to occur in Seattle so I posted it here.

    The sudden rush to strictly apply the "not related to open carry in WA" lens is interesting. Looks like people construe "name calling" in my post -- I think that's actually true! Guess I am just venting, among what I thought were also people who appreciate that there are lots of folks out there who think the marshal in question should have a gun but we shouldn't.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kirkland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    121

    Post imported post

    Machoduck wrote:
    This is how I took it. I have no special dispension from Tai4de2 to speak for him.
    You got it exactly right. Thanks for the analysis.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278

    Post imported post

    tai4de2 wrote:
    I can not speak for others but my response was to the "libtard" comment. I am guessing you are conservative by the comment you made. It is a fine line with some of us when you start throwing the word "libtard" around because I am liberal and am not anti-2nd Amendment.

    Also, I know MANY liberals who would never own a firearm but are not against others owning firearms. Some of the gun control laws that have been established over the past few decades have been by conservatives. Both sides have their share of gun grabbers.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    South of Disorder in Rouge Canyon, , USA
    Posts
    272

    Post imported post

    IMO ... ... I think we need to know the real world around us and if that means "Posting" something about a "Hot Topic" then so be it ! ! I think people have a right to know this stuff ...

    I think people have the right to know whether the Everett Police Officer Troy Meade on trial for murder gets convicted or not and if it is done through this site "so be it"

    Now with that being said: OpenCarry.org has an option ! ! ! Please read on ... ...

    I also belong to another forum that is specific to motorcycles and they had the same issue that we have here "People getting upset with Off Topic Posts" Soooo, they created a special area called the "Hot Box" where any topic goes and if you don't like it don't go in.

    With that being said: "If you don't like a topic don't read it"



  15. #15
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Bersa.380 wrote:
    I also belong to another forum that is specific to motorcycles and they had the same issue that we have here "People getting upset with Off Topic Posts" Soooo, they created a special area called the "Hot Box" where any topic goes and if you don't like it don't go in.
    I've seen those kinds of special no-holds barred subforums. They're very cool. The blow-hards on forums where they have tried that HATE them. They simply cannot handle a verbal argument where someone can bluntly tell them how, uhm, limited they and their feeble opinions are.

    A "Hot Box" special area would be G-R-E-A-T on any forum where people discuss important, emotionally-chargedand political subjects. Some really nice argumentation can occur in that uncensored environment. And the chuckleheads get outed...



    Bersa.380 wrote:
    With that being said: "If you don't like a topic don't read it"
    Good point. Very simply valid.

    But some people simply want to control a given forum with their rather whiny attempts at creating a politically correct environment that--surprise--doesn't talk about stuff they don't agree with.



  16. #16
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,666

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    Bersa.380 wrote:
    I also belong to another forum that is specific to motorcycles and they had the same issue that we have here "People getting upset with Off Topic Posts" Soooo, they created a special area called the "Hot Box" where any topic goes and if you don't like it don't go in.
    I've seen those kinds of special no-holds barred subforums. They're very cool. The blow-hards on forums where they have tried that HATE them. They simply cannot handle a verbal argument where someone can bluntly tell them how, uhm, limited they and their feeble opinions are.

    A "Hot Box" special area would be G-R-E-A-T on any forum where people discuss important, emotionally-chargedand political subjects. Some really nice argumentation can occur in that uncensored environment. And the chuckleheads get outed...



    Bersa.380 wrote:
    With that being said: "If you don't like a topic don't read it"
    Good point. Very simply valid.

    But some people simply want to control a given forum with their rather whiny attempts at creating a politically correct environment that--surprise--doesn't talk about stuff they don't agree with.

    Actually we are guests of Mike S. and John P. and they have set the rules. <--- read them if you haven't. If they don't like you not following their rules you can be banned. If you wan't to make those type of comments go somewhere else.
    Live Free or Die!

  17. #17
    Regular Member Batousaii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Kitsap Co., Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,234

    Post imported post

    gogodawgs wrote:
    Actually we are guests of Mike S. and John P. and they have set the rules. <--- read them if you haven't. If they don't like you not following their rules you can be banned. If you wan't to make those type of comments go somewhere else.
    +1+ We are intentionally trying to maintain a positive image, and encourage the positive and responsible behaviour that would be included with that image..


    ~ ENCLAVE vmc ~
    The Enclave is looking for patriotic motorcycle riders in Washington State who support liberty and freedom for all. ~ Check us out!
    ~
    * " To be swayed neither by the opponent nor by his sword is the essence of swordsmanship." - Miyamoto Musashi.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Tomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    University Place, Washington, USA
    Posts
    705

    Post imported post

    OT: I'm Admin at a number of forums and other sites, and one of the biggest "misunderstandings" in on-line forums is "freedom of speech."

    Here is my boilerplate quote I toss in when folks start going at it:

    "Freedom of Speech" is not a term that applies to any private site that allows posting by members. The US First Amendment only applies to not allowing the US government to censor most speech. As soon as you step into a private site like this, you are in someone else's livingroom or office, not in a public space, and the owner - the person paying the bills - can set any rules they want and a poster can either agree or leave. No problem, but just trying to correct an all too common error of perception about the internet. (Also note that if any site is not in the US, the rules can change drastically...)

    OK, back to whatever this was about.
    No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: The officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets. -- Edward Abbey

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Facimus!

  19. #19
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    gogodawgs wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    Bersa.380 wrote:
    I also belong to another forum that is specific to motorcycles and they had the same issue that we have here "People getting upset with Off Topic Posts" Soooo, they created a special area called the "Hot Box" where any topic goes and if you don't like it don't go in.
    I've seen those kinds of special no-holds barred subforums. They're very cool. The blow-hards on forums where they have tried that HATE them. They simply cannot handle a verbal argument where someone can bluntly tell them how, uhm, limited they and their feeble opinions are.

    A "Hot Box" special area would be G-R-E-A-T on any forum where people discuss important, emotionally-chargedand political subjects. Some really nice argumentation can occur in that uncensored environment. And the chuckleheads get outed...



    Bersa.380 wrote:
    With that being said: "If you don't like a topic don't read it"
    Good point. Very simply valid.

    But some people simply want to control a given forum with their rather whiny attempts at creating a politically correct environment that--surprise--doesn't talk about stuff they don't agree with.

    Actually we are guests of Mike S. and John P. and they have set the rules. <--- read them if you haven't. If they don't like you not following their rules you can be banned. If you wan't to make those type of comments go somewhere else.
    My comments, contrary to your mistaken description, were on the basis that we were talking about posts that are compliant with the existing forum rules, whatever they may be on whatever forum we can cite. Some people, even here at OCDO, complain about discussion or POVs they disagree with--even though such discussions and POVs are compliant with the rules of the forum.

    I comply with the rules of any discussion forum. It's the obvious correct thing to do. I likefollowing the rules of a forum. And it's always interesting to see those that do not slowly move toward being banned.Like CV6 most recently. Like S357 before him.

    The rules at OCDO are easily complied with. And I do. Even though others do not. OCDO is a private site. It can make its own rules, of which it was but a few. It is a stellar example of discussion forum administration in the area of allowing open discussion about relevant issues but not tolerating bad behavior, i.e., bashing LEOs.

    If you can ever see someone not following the rules of this here forum, GGD, I would hope that you have the ability and time to point it out.

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran gogodawgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Federal Way, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,666

    Post imported post

    Hank T,

    I agree with you on your post above.

    On the OP, while the topic technically falls within the rules, it is easy to see that it can move towards LEO bashing, not allowed.

    The rules also ask us to police ourselves. I think that in this case that is what many have expressed on this topic.
    Live Free or Die!

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    123

    Post imported post

    Then again, there are some in law enforcement, including myself, that do not really consider federal air marshals "law enforcement." So, bash away at the scumbag FAM.

    However, please do count me in with those that consider the term "libtard" ridiculous in the extreme. Aside from the fact that use of such a silly word makes one appear uneducatedand prejudiced, there are those of us old enough to remember that until quite recently, it was the conservatives who supported the concept of cops as knowledgeable professionals when it came to firearms, and the so-called "liberals" (especially the young, radical "hippies," protesters, activists and other socialists) that railed against law enforcement as the armed minions of a tyrannical government. Anyone here recall the '60s and '70s?

  22. #22
    Regular Member Tomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    University Place, Washington, USA
    Posts
    705

    Post imported post

    Bo wrote:
    Then again, there are some in law enforcement, including myself, that do not really consider federal air marshals "law enforcement." So, bash away at the scumbag FAM.

    However, please do count me in with those that consider the term "libtard" ridiculous in the extreme. Aside from the fact that use of such a silly word makes one appear uneducatedand prejudiced, there are those of us old enough to remember that until quite recently, it was the conservatives who supported the concept of cops as knowledgeable professionals when it came to firearms, and the so-called "liberals" (especially the young, radical "hippies," protesters, activists and other socialists) that railed against law enforcement as the armed minions of a tyrannical government. Anyone here recall the '60s and '70s?
    Just QFT.

    Born before the end of WW II, I definitely remember the '60s and '70s, and spent a bit of that time frame in 'Nam.
    No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: The officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets. -- Edward Abbey

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Facimus!

  23. #23
    Regular Member amzbrady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,522

    Post imported post

    gogodawgs wrote:
    Hank T,

    I agree with you on your post above.

    On the OP, while the topic technically falls within the rules, it is easy to see that it can move towards LEO bashing, not allowed.

    The rules also ask us to police ourselves. I think that in this case that is what many have expressed on this topic.
    I would think if he broke the law, that would make him NOT a "Law Enforcement Officer".
    If you voted for Obama to prove you are not a racist...
    what will you do now to prove you are not stupid?

    "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism," they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." - Norman Thomas

    "They who can who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve niether liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Kirkland, Washington, USA
    Posts
    121

    Post imported post

    Bo wrote:
    However, please do count me in with those that consider the term "libtard" ridiculous in the extreme. Aside from the fact that use of such a silly word makes one appear uneducatedand prejudiced, there are those of us old enough to remember that until quite recently, it was the conservatives who supported the concept of cops as knowledgeable professionals when it came to firearms
    I'm fine with being considered prejudiced -- against those who would capriciously take our rights away without logical reasoning grounded in actual facts instead of emotional pablum. Sheeple, libtards, morons, etc etc... call them what you will.

    Among people who would do that, the thought that only LE should have access to firearms is a standard talking point. I enjoy exposing such people to ridicule.

    It is not and was not ever my intention to bash LE and in fact I absolutely support "the concept of cops as knowledgeable professionals when it came to firearms." Where did I say I didn't?

  25. #25
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    tai4de2 wrote:
    I'm fine with being considered prejudiced -- against those who would capriciously take our rights away without logical reasoning grounded in actual facts instead of emotional pablum. Sheeple, libtards, morons, etc etc... call them what you will.

    Among people who would do that, the thought that only LE should have access to firearms is a standard talking point. I enjoy exposing such people to ridicule.

    But your attempted association of the libtard talking point that only LE should have gunswith theheinous actions ofone LEO in a specific case is .....really strained.

    It'sillogical. And very weak.

    Torefute your supposed "ridicule," all a libtard would have to say is "I believe that only LE should have guns but that doesn't mean I support some wacko LEO who would rape some woman with it!"

    You "expose" nothing.

    Try to come up with something better to criticize the libtards with. Something more defensible.




Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •