It's telling that they're only raising this question because of the cops who have died. They don't give two ***** about the innocent people they've killed.
If DHS had their way, local police would completely abandon military and SWAT-style tactics and simply adopt the policies and tactics of the Khmer Rouge and the Stasi They were originally set up and directed by ex-Stasi and KGB officials, after all...
Good grief! Can we please put away our tinfoil hats for a couple of minutes?
To my knowledge there is no empirical evidence that refutes his assertion completely. It is obvious that rethinking the question is productive for both LE and the citizenry. What is not obvious is the motivation other than officer safety. If the safety of the citizenry were the top priority does it not follow that any tactics used to ensure a citizens safety would also ensure officer safety?A conclusion not supported by the evidence.
It is good that they are rethinking the procedure for whatever reason.
Thanks for the citation to the seer of our doom.
Actually, I think it's pretty well supported by the evidence.A conclusion not supported by the evidence.
It is good that they are rethinking the procedure for whatever reason.
--snip-- They don't give two ***** about the innocent people they've killed.
A conclusion not supported by the evidence.
--snip--
Actually, I think it's pretty well supported by the evidence.
--snip--
Again, the evidence points to callousness at best, with some holding their victims in contempt.The comment/reply to which I was responding is bolded above.
When we criticize others for using emotionalism, baseless conclusions, and attack any group based on a personal opinion, we are as guilty as the antis. Deal in facts gentleman - facts. Leave the suppositions and raucous verbiage to those that have nothing else to provide. I fail to understand why this methodology escapes some.
Do I like no-knock warrants? - absolutely not. Do I know of or have evidence that they are conducted by those that would kill innocent people w/o feeling anything? Absolutely not. Have no knock warrants been the subject of serious problems? - You bet.
I am not sure that what you like or dislike is the point here.The comment/reply to which I was responding is bolded above.
When we criticize others for using emotionalism, baseless conclusions, and attack any group based on a personal opinion, we are as guilty as the antis. Deal in facts gentleman - facts. Leave the suppositions and raucous verbiage to those that have nothing else to provide. I fail to understand why this methodology escapes some.
Do I like no-knock warrants? - absolutely not. Do I know of or have evidence that they are conducted by those that would kill innocent people w/o feeling anything? Absolutely not. Have no knock warrants been the subject of serious problems? - You bet.
I am not sure that what you like or dislike is the point here.
You stated "A conclusion not supported by the evidence." regarding ()pen(arry's post. Do you know that his conclusion is not supported by evidence? I believe it is incumbent upon all of us to provide facts, with cites, to support our statements. ()pen(arry not providing facts (cites) to support his conclusion does not invalidate his conclusion. Unless you have facts (cites) that refute his conclusion, then ()pen(arry's conclusion should not be classified as a baseless conclusion, derived from emotion just because he provides no facts to validate his conclusion. It is clearly his opinion and should be taken as such.
Originally Posted by Grapeshot
The comment/reply to which I was responding is bolded above.
When we criticize others for using emotionalism, baseless conclusions, and attack any group based on a personal opinion, we are as guilty as the antis. Deal in facts gentleman - facts. Leave the suppositions and raucous verbiage to those that have nothing else to provide. I fail to understand why this methodology escapes some.
Do I like no-knock warrants? - absolutely not. Do I know of or have evidence that they are conducted by those that would kill innocent people w/o feeling anything? Absolutely not. Have no knock warrants been the subject of serious problems? - You bet.
I am not sure that what you like or dislike is the point here.
You stated "A conclusion not supported by the evidence." regarding ()pen(arry's post. Do you know that his conclusion is not supported by evidence? I believe it is incumbent upon all of us to provide facts, with cites, to support our statements. ()pen(arry not providing facts (cites) to support his conclusion does not invalidate his conclusion. Unless you have facts (cites) that refute his conclusion, then ()pen(arry's conclusion should not be classified as a baseless conclusion, derived from emotion just because he provides no facts to validate his conclusion. It is clearly his opinion and should be taken as such.
Yes his conclusion is not supported by evidence He didn't provide it here, where it counts. Didn't say "invalidates" - said "not supported". Nevertheless I will take another step - the remark is baseless, inflammatory and not acceptable. It violates the rules, intent, and limitations to which we all agree when posting here.
Not all opinions are simply accepted nor excused on the grounds that they are only opinions.
BTW - notice that I have changed hats? Prefer to moderate with a light hand unless it becomes necessary to do otherwise. It remains in my perview to do so. IMO this has now been been escalated beyond a not well thought out remark which is unfortunate as I never thought that was ()pen(arry's purpose.
Grapeshot are you going SOFT on us?
That's one of the cases to which I referred.Don't even get me started...