Federal air marshal rapes woman in Seattle

tai4de2 · Apr 22, 2010

imported post

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/04/22/federal-air-marshal-charged-raping-woman-airport-hotel/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Flatest+%28Text+-+Latest+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?)

gogodawgs · Apr 22, 2010

imported post

Sorry, I did see this and see no purpose on the OCDO website.

Citizen · Apr 22, 2010

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.

Aaron1124 · Apr 22, 2010

imported post

Let the LE bashing begin in

5..

4..

3..

2..

1..

swatspyder · Apr 22, 2010

imported post

IBTL :celebrate

Beretta92FSLady · Apr 22, 2010

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.

Machoduck · Apr 22, 2010

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.

killchain · Apr 22, 2010

imported post

tai4de2 wrote:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/04/22/federal-air-marshal-charged-raping-woman-airport-hotel/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Flatest+%28Text+-+Latest+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.

HankT · Apr 23, 2010

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...

Tomas · Apr 23, 2010

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?")

tai4de2 · Apr 23, 2010

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.

tai4de2 · Apr 23, 2010

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.

Beretta92FSLady · Apr 23, 2010

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.

Bersa.380 · Apr 24, 2010

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"

HankT · Apr 24, 2010

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.

gogodawgs · Apr 24, 2010

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.

Click to expand...

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"

Click to expand...

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.

Batousaii · Apr 24, 2010

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..

Tomas · Apr 24, 2010

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. :lol:

HankT · Apr 24, 2010

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.

Click to expand...

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"

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

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.

gogodawgs · Apr 24, 2010

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.

Federal air marshal rapes woman in Seattle

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

State Researcher

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

State Researcher

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

State Researcher

Campaign Veteran