Jump to content

Black Lives Matter


Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

One of life’s great ironies is that folks who take the side of the superiority of any race of people are almost always a shining example of the opposite. 

Those who assume the mantle of superiority in any form are almost always a shining example of the opposite.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

According to the police report the statue slipped and fell into the river.

LOL...really...LOL...one of the lefts favorite rants is against privatized prisons...

Posted Images

20 minutes ago, Dog said:

Those who assume the mantle of superiority in any form are almost always a shining example of the opposite.

"One must earn ".  Talking in the third person dog.  No show of superiority there at all.

image.png.c8074d2f6c9022d94916ff475d5c9283.png

The best part of this is that I've become so used to masks that I didn't even realize they'd put one in the meme.  Amazing how fast things change.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Dog said:

"Judicial Watch is demanding that they be allowed to paint their motto “Because No One is Above the Law” after the city painted, “Black Lives Matter” on a street and allowed protesters to paint, “Defund the Police” next to it.

No, they are not.

I have it on good authority they don't.  See below.

On 7/8/2020 at 4:25 PM, Dog said:

OFGS....Judicial Watch does not want to paint anything on the street....Jesus!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

No, they are not.

I have it on good authority they don't.  See below.

 

Demanding that they be allowed to, and wanting to, are two different things.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have "Defund the Police" written on the street in front of the police department.  Though, it is oriented so it is more easily read from the Mayor's Office in City Hall.  It's good for them to think in term of being peace officers as opposed to some sort of militant group.

We have an awesome "Graffiti Alley" on Howard Street, near North Avenue. Very close to MICA.  Tourists admire it.  Graffiti Alley Images

Crosswalks all over town have been painted by neighborhoods to be different, fanciful, and informative.  Rainbow motifs, keyboards, hopscotch, etc.

There are loads of buildings with murals painted on them.  A colleague's daughter has catalogued them. BaltiMurals

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dog said:

Demanding that they be allowed to, and wanting to, are two different things.

So, they are wasting time and money demanding the right to do something they don't "want" to do.

That sounds like a frivolous lawsuit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

We have "Defund the Police" written on the street in front of the police department.  Though, it is oriented so it is more easily read from the Mayor's Office in City Hall.  It's good for them to think in term of being peace officers as opposed to some sort of militant group.

We have an awesome "Graffiti Alley" on Howard Street, near North Avenue. Very close to MICA.  Tourists admire it.  Graffiti Alley Images

Crosswalks all over town have been painted by neighborhoods to be different, fanciful, and informative.  Rainbow motifs, keyboards, hopscotch, etc.

There are loads of buildings with murals painted on them.  A colleague's daughter has catalogued them. BaltiMurals

So - there shouldn't be an issue w/another perspective being represented, right?  ( BTW - I'm with ya in my appreciation of urban art - lots in Philly too) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

We have "Defund the Police" written on the street in front of the police department.  Though, it is oriented so it is more easily read from the Mayor's Office in City Hall.  It's good for them to think in term of being peace officers as opposed to some sort of militant group.

We have an awesome "Graffiti Alley" on Howard Street, near North Avenue. Very close to MICA.  Tourists admire it.  Graffiti Alley Images

Crosswalks all over town have been painted by neighborhoods to be different, fanciful, and informative.  Rainbow motifs, keyboards, hopscotch, etc.

There are loads of buildings with murals painted on them.  A colleague's daughter has catalogued them. BaltiMurals

I get that, (I was recently involved in renovations to an old building on the outskirts of Trenton in which we went to pains to preserve some very fine examples of graffiti art, pic attached) Personally I don't consider the BLM slogans painted on the street in Washington and NY to be worthy of the term art and don't support it. What do you think our cities would look like if the right to paint slogans on the street were extended equitably the all as opposed to just the politically connected.

https://i.postimg.cc/ZqQjRcmP/57.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

I get that, (I was recently involved in renovations to an old building on the outskirts of Trenton in which we went to pains to preserve some very fine examples of graffiti art, pic attached) Personally I don't consider the BLM slogans painted on the street in Washington and NY to be worthy of the term art and don't support it. What do you think our cities would look like if the right to paint slogans on the street were extended equitably the all as opposed to just the politically connected.

https://i.postimg.cc/ZqQjRcmP/57.jpg

I believe that art is subjective.  Your interpretation and mine may not agree.  That means your opinion is worth the same as mine.

So, whether you "personally" don't consider BLM on a street to be art or not, it doesn't matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bus Driver said:

I believe that art is subjective.  Your interpretation and mine may not agree.  That means your opinion is worth the same as mine.

So, whether you "personally" don't consider BLM on a street to be art or not, it doesn't matter.

I agree.   "Art is subjective" - so, if we can have Mapplethorpe's "Piss Christ" proclaimed as a bold, avant garde piece, and the disgust of all who were offended by it disregarded, then it seems that the same consideration is warranted for other art forms and the folks who are offended by them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:
21 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I believe that art is subjective.  Your interpretation and mine may not agree.  That means your opinion is worth the same as mine.

So, whether you "personally" don't consider BLM on a street to be art or not, it doesn't matter.

I agree.   "Art is subjective" - so, if we can have Mapplethorpe's "Piss Christ" proclaimed as a bold, avant garde piece, and the disgust of all who were offended by it disregarded, then it seems that the same consideration is warranted for other art forms and the folks who are offended by them. 

In lieu of "disregarding" the disgust of people who are offended by art, how should we handle pieces like the one you describe?  Do we need a "Decency Board"?

(edit) I treat "art" I find offensive the same way I treat posts from folks I find offensive - I do my best to scroll by.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I believe that art is subjective.  Your interpretation and mine may not agree.  That means your opinion is worth the same as mine.

So, whether you "personally" don't consider BLM on a street to be art or not, it doesn't matter.

True...Does that mean anyone should be allowed to paint whatever they want on our streets as long as they deem it to be art or is that a right preserved for the politically connected?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dog said:

True...Does that mean anyone should be allowed to paint whatever they want on our streets as long as they deem it to be art or is that a right preserved for the politically connected?

Painting "Black Live Matter" and "Defund The Police" is not done for artistic purposes.  These statements are part of a protest.  Call it a First Amendment issue.

Are you of the opinion, like President Trump, that the 1A should not be available for those who say things you/he don't like?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Painting "Black Live Matter" and "Defund The Police" is not done for artistic purposes.  These statements are part of a protest.  Call it a First Amendment issue.

Are you of the opinion, like President Trump, that the 1A should not be available for those who say things you/he don't like?

No...I think the first amendment applies to everyone. I don't think that means everyone has the right to paint statements of protest on public property.

Do you think we all have the right to paint statements of protest on public property or is that right only for the politically connected?

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

In lieu of "disregarding" the disgust of people who are offended by art, how should we handle pieces like the one you describe?  Do we need a "Decency Board"?

(edit) I treat "art" I find offensive the same way I treat posts from folks I find offensive - I do my best to scroll by.

IMHO?   THAT is the right answer, sir - I don't think that appeasing one group at the expense of another is an appropriate approach.  I'm not extending this perspective to specific instances of damage caused by the intentional act of another - if someone steals from you, then consideration for their perspective begins once they've made you whole. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dog said:

No...I think the first amendment applies to everyone. I don't think that means everyone has the right to paint statements of protest on public property.

Do you think we all have the right to paint statements of protest on public property or is that right only for the politically connected?

I feel people should do what they want to do, as long as they accept the repercussions of those actions.  In this case, I believe the city leaders made a calculated decision to allow the expression though the painting on the street as acceptable and better than shutting it down.

My son was downtown when they painted "Defund the Police" on Gay Street, in front of City Hall.  As I said, the Police headquarters is right there, at Fayette and Gay.  Police were everywhere.  The kept their distance, allowed the protest to take place, directed traffic to keep people safe, and it went well.  In fact, there have been protests every day in Baltimore, for weeks, and you will be hard pressed to find any problems.  The Police and the community both learned hard lessons from the violence of 2015, after Freddie Gray died at the hands of police.

Protests have been a huge part of this nation's history.  Sometimes, it is necessary to expose a problem needing to be addressed.  You don't have to like it, or approve of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm absolutely supportive of protests, and an adamant supporter of 1A rights.  There's a limit to what I'd consider to be acceptable protest, and that limit is passed when the protesters do something that endangers others, or destroys things - both of those are direct infringements on someone ELSE's rights, and those deserve to be protected as well.  Until then?  That that sometimes ugly expression is legally protected is part of what makes the US great.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I feel people should do what they want to do, as long as they accept the repercussions of those actions.  In this case, I believe the city leaders made a calculated decision to allow the expression though the painting on the street as acceptable and better than shutting it down.

My son was downtown when they painted "Defund the Police" on Gay Street, in front of City Hall.  As I said, the Police headquarters is right there, at Fayette and Gay.  Police were everywhere.  The kept their distance, allowed the protest to take place, directed traffic to keep people safe, and it went well.  In fact, there have been protests every day in Baltimore, for weeks, and you will be hard pressed to find any problems.  The Police and the community both learned hard lessons from the violence of 2015, after Freddie Gray died at the hands of police.

Protests have been a huge part of this nation's history.  Sometimes, it is necessary to expose a problem needing to be addressed.  You don't have to like it, or approve of it.

I expect the repercussions for painting “black lives matter” on the street in front of Trump Tower by the politically connected would be different than the repercussions if some red hats painted “Make America Great Again” on the street in front of Gracie Mansion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Dog said:

I expect the repercussions for painting “black lives matter” on the street in front of Trump Tower by the politically connected would be different than the repercussions if some red hats painted “Make America Great Again” on the street in front of Gracie Mansion.

So, it's an issue of "fairness".

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Oh look, the culture war dragged in AGITC to Dogs thread of bullshit.

I see AGITC didn’t bother to read the lawsuit either, just is accepting @Dogs lies, because the sound so good to “conservatives”

Nothing here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

It’s sad how much ire you have for liberal politicians when all you can muster for Trump is a forceful fellation while he tosses you culture war bullshit. 

Or here

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

So, it's an issue of "fairness".

Yes, but it's more than that. It's also about the protection of public property and the use of public property to advance political agendas.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Dog said:

Yes, but it's more than that. It's also about the protection of public property and the use of public property to advance political agendas.

Sounds like folks who insist on displaying the 10 Commandments in a courthouse or erecting statues of traitors in public parks.

Can I assume you oppose those with equal zeal?

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:
1 hour ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

IMHO?   THAT is the right answer, sir - I don't think that appeasing one group at the expense of another is an appropriate approach.  I'm not extending this perspective to specific instances of damage caused by the intentional act of another - if someone steals from you, then consideration for their perspective begins once they've made you whole. 

Oh look, the culture war dragged in AGITC to Dogs thread of bullshit.

I see AGITC didn’t bother to read the lawsuit either, just is accepting @Dogs lies, because the sound so good to “conservatives”

I trust you know A guy's response, which you've quoted, was not response to a post written by Dog.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

So renaming it Ronald Reagan airport was an explicitly political act, to advance a political agenda, and that should be banned. The dumb whore wasn’t even dead yet when you cunts sought to venerate him as St Ronnie  the divine

Yep.  They wanted to memorialize him with something in EVERY county in the US.  That's over 3,000.

They're trying to deify Ronald Reagan: Inside the right-wing plot to turn the Gipper into a modern-day God

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

Note how @Dog  @BravoBravo and the Reich . . 

seem totally unconcerned about white supremacist violence 

during these events. 

The mythical white supremacist ... 

  • Downvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Note how @Dog  @BravoBravo and the US Reich live in a fantasy bubble . .  

Full of anger and angst about what is non-existent (an Antifa role in the violence) 

and in complete and total denial of empirical facts about the numerous instances 

of far-Reich violence around the demonstrations. 

This is the same kind of willful ignorance that drives their racism, 

This article is pretty balanced . . 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-28/antifa-boogaloo-extremists-at-us-floyd-protests/12388260

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

Note how @Dog  @BravoBravo and the US Reich live in a fantasy bubble . .  

Full of anger and angst about what is non-existent (an Antifa role in the violence) 

and in complete and total denial of empirical facts about the numerous instances 

of far-Reich violence around the demonstrations. 

This is the same kind of willful ignorance that drives their racism, 

This article is pretty balanced . . 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-28/antifa-boogaloo-extremists-at-us-floyd-protests/12388260

 

Speaking of denial.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dog said:

Blame for inspiring violence...of course.

“If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously, okay? Just knock the hell … I promise you I will pay for the legal fees. I promise, I promise.”

“He’s walking out with big high-fives, smiling, laughing. I’d like to punch him in the face, I’ll tell you.”

“Get him out. Try not to hurt him. If you do, I’ll defend you in court, don’t worry about it.”

“Part of the reason it takes so long is nobody wants to hurt each other anymore, and they’re being politically correct the way they took them out. So it takes a little bit longer. And honestly, the protesters realize it, they realize there are no consequences to protesting anymore.”

“The audience hit back. That’s what we need a little more of.”

“Although the Second Amendment people—maybe there is, I don’t know.”

“Any guy that can do a body slam, he is my type!”

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

“If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously, okay? Just knock the hell … I promise you I will pay for the legal fees. I promise, I promise.”

“He’s walking out with big high-fives, smiling, laughing. I’d like to punch him in the face, I’ll tell you.”

“Get him out. Try not to hurt him. If you do, I’ll defend you in court, don’t worry about it.”

“Part of the reason it takes so long is nobody wants to hurt each other anymore, and they’re being politically correct the way they took them out. So it takes a little bit longer. And honestly, the protesters realize it, they realize there are no consequences to protesting anymore.”

“The audience hit back. That’s what we need a little more of.”

“Although the Second Amendment people—maybe there is, I don’t know.”

“Any guy that can do a body slam, he is my type!”

The man is an asshole, but I thought you disapproved of whataboutism.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2020 at 11:39 AM, hasher said:

Why does anyone deny this?

Maybe an unarmed man running away without a lethal weapon needs to be shot?

A black man jogging through the neighborhood needs to die.

I just don't understand why this is not clear.  How many more need to die before they get the message?

Damn, people are stupid.

I’m sorry, who here is denying this shit is Disgusting and wrong?  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dog said:

The man is an asshole, but I thought you disapproved of whataboutism.

Just quoting the man advocating/inspiring violence.

I'm surprised you didn't just pronounce such a lack of political finesses to be "refreshing".

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

I believe that art is subjective.  Your interpretation and mine may not agree.  That means your opinion is worth the same as mine.

So, whether you "personally" don't consider BLM on a street to be art or not, it doesn't matter.

I don’t consider BLM being painted on the street as “art”. It’s 1st  Amendment speech. And as such, how would you feel if the White power shits painted a big KKK outside of CITY HALL?  Or the gun rights nutters painted a big “Molon Labe” outside on a Main Street. All protected speech, right?

ETA: I’m 100% in favor of the BLM murals and street graffiti. But I’m just curious what the level of fauxrage will be when a group they don’t like do the same. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

I don’t consider BLM being painted on the street as “art”. It’s 1st  Amendment speech. And as such, how would you feel if the White power shits painted a big KKK outside of CITY HALL?  Or the gun rights nutters painted a big “Molon Labe” outside on a Main Street. All protected speech, right?

I may not like it.  But, I would see it the same way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Burning Man said:

I don’t consider BLM being painted on the street as “art”. It’s 1st  Amendment speech. And as such, how would you feel if the White power shits painted a big KKK outside of CITY HALL?  Or the gun rights nutters painted a big “Molon Labe” outside on a Main Street. All protected speech, right?

Actually, no, in the couple spots where I know it was legally done, it was done by city art commissions (DC and NYC)

Nothing to do with 1st Amendment Rights. 

But not surprised you'd get that wrong, too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

I don’t consider BLM being painted on the street as “art”. It’s 1st  Amendment speech. And as such, how would you feel if the White power shits painted a big KKK outside of CITY HALL?  Or the gun rights nutters painted a big “Molon Labe” outside on a Main Street. All protected speech, right?

Protected speech if done on their own property.  Otherwise subject to the same statutes against defacing public property everyone else has.  Got it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bus Driver said:

I may not like it.  But, I would see it the same way.

Thank you sir. I’m sure you’re one of the few honest people here who would admit that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

I don’t consider BLM being painted on the street as “art”. It’s 1st  Amendment speech. And as such, how would you feel if the White power shits painted a big KKK outside of CITY HALL?  Or the gun rights nutters painted a big “Molon Labe” outside on a Main Street. All protected speech, right?

ETA: I’m 100% in favor of the BLM murals and street graffiti. But I’m just curious what the level of fauxrage will be when a group they don’t like do the same. 

There is hate speech and there is political speech.  They are not the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, hasher said:

There is hate speech and there is political speech.  They are not the same.

Is something like “ALL LIVES MATTER” hate speech?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only a fucking maroon would not think that lives matter.

The issue is, black and brown people are attacked and killed for their color.  Both the government and others think it is okay to kill them.  It's going to change or you won't have a functioning society.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

Is something like “ALL LIVES MATTER” hate speech?

Have you figured out the BLM murals aren't "free speech" yet?

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

You tell me. That’s why we pay you the big bucks. 

50 states = 49 different definitions of a hate crime (South Cack, Wyoming, one other don't define it, DC does - 47+1+1)

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, hasher said:

Only a fucking maroon would not think that lives matter.

The issue is, black and brown people are attacked and killed for their color.  Both the government and others think it is okay to kill them.  It's going to change or you won't have a functioning society.

What data do you have to support this?  It seems that 6% of the population commits over 50% of the homicides.  Would you not expect that group to be proportionately represented in police killings?  In fact, it is underrepresented.  If you are a violent criminal, you are less likely to be killed by police if you are black than if you are white.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, jzk said:

What data do you have to support this?  It seems that 6% of the population commits over 50% of the homicides.  Would you not expect that group to be proportionately represented in police killings?  In fact, it is underrepresented.  If you are a violent criminal, you are less likely to be killed by police if you are black than if you are white.

When officers shoot fleeing people who are unarmed and committed no serious crime, it is a problem.

There are hate crime bills because it is a real phenomena.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hasher said:

When officers shoot fleeing people who are unarmed and committed no serious crime, it is a problem.

There are hate crime bills because it is a real phenomena.  

Yes, but it is not a racial problem.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jzk said:

Yes, but it is not a racial problem.  

Yes it is.  That's why it called hate crime.  It is also why police are occasionally (but not often enough) fired and/or prosecuted for using excessive force.

The black man at the Wendy's in Atlanta was shot in the back.  The black jogger in Brunswick was assassinated and racial epitaphs were used.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hasher said:

Yes it is.  That's why it called hate crime.  It is also why police are occasionally (but not often enough) fired and/or prosecuted for using excessive force.

The black man at the Wendy's in Atlanta was shot in the back.  The black jogger in Brunswick was assassinated and racial epitaphs were used.

What evidence is there that the Wendy's shooting was racially motivated?  A couple of black cops shot a white guy running from them as well in a Chicago train station.  People are people.  But there is no statistical evidence of a systemic racial problem.  

Further, the BLM movement seems to be limited to black criminals.  Black Criminals Lives Matter.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jzk said:

What evidence is there that the Wendy's shooting was racially motivated?  A couple of black cops shot a white guy running from them as well in a Chicago train station.  People are people.  But there is no statistical evidence of a systemic racial problem.  

Further, the BLM movement seems to be limited to black criminals.  Black Criminals Lives Matter.  

Two white cops, one black man shot in the book.  There's 30 minutes of video showing an intelligent exchange and his begging them to let him walk home.  

There is a real phenomena called driving while black.  There is also danger when walking while black.  Police profiling is widespread and highly documented.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, hasher said:

Two white cops, one black man shot in the book.  There's 30 minutes of video showing an intelligent exchange and his begging them to let him walk him.  

There is a real phenomena called driving while black.  There is also danger when walking while black.  Police profiling is widespread and highly documented.

Two white cops arresting a black person passed out drunk in a Wendy's drive through line is not evidence that it was racially motivated.  Further, actual police killings statistically favor white violent criminals over black violent criminals.  Maybe that is racially motivated.  Cops are probably extra cautious when dealing with a black person because of the repercussions that could follow.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

@Dog is furious Baltimore is trying to discipline a police force that acts like this

https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/crime/bs-md-ci-cr-bpd-detective-arrested-20200710-fb2ctzpkondxhdmreklugc75n4-story.html

Who arrested him?

What Dog is most pissed about is the rising body count resulting from reactive policing following BLM's perpetrating the lie of systemic targeting. Black lives matter indeed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dog said:

The entire BLM movement is animated by events that are about as prevalent as deaths by lightning strike.

Black Violent Criminals Who Resist Arrest Lives Matter.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Ohhhh, extra troll from dog. Tucker must not have provided you enough racism last night.

TBF: Tucker did just lose his head writer (Blake Neff, because he was revealed to be a white supremacist incel)...

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jzk said:

Black Violent Criminals Who Resist Arrest Lives Matter.  

Where are the videos of white violent criminals getting shot in the back for running from police? Are there no violent white criminals, or what's up with that? 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Mark K said:

Where are the videos of white violent criminals getting shot in the back for running from police? Are there no violent white criminals, or what's up with that? 

There must be lots of vids of white folks getting shot dozens of times in their cars.  RIght?

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Just not the vids, eh?

I think I found one! 

 

 

 Whoops, my bad.

Man, all that aggression and the officer never felt his life was in danger?  Didn't see that coming. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Police execute search warrant at home of gun-toting couple

Source: AP

ST. LOUIS (AP) — Authorities executed a search warrant at the St. Louis mansion of a white couple whose armed defense of their home during a recent racial injustice protest drew widespread attention, their attorney confirmed Saturday. 

Mark and Patricia McCloskey, who are personal injury lawyers, were caught on video brandishing guns as demonstrators walked past their Renaissance palazzo-style home on June 28 while headed to protest outside of the mayor’s home nearby. The video showed Mark McCloskey, 61, wielding a long-barreled gun and Patricia McCloskey, 63 standing next to him waving a handgun. 

Joel Schwartz, the couple’s lawyer, said a search warrant was served Friday evening and that the gun Mark McCloskey was holding in the video was seized. Schwartz told The Associated Press that arrangements have been made to turn over to authorities on Saturday the gun that Patricia McCloskey had been holding, adding that her gun was inoperable at the time of the protest and still is. 

The couple has not been charged, and Schwartz said charges against them would be “absolutely, positively unmerited.” 

800.jpeg

FILE - In this June 28, 2020 file photo, armed homeowners Mark and Patricia McCloskey, standing in front their house along Portland Place confront protesters marching to St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson's house in the Central West End of St. Louis. Authorities executed a search warrant Friday evening, July 10, 2020, at the St. Louis mansion owned by the McCloskey's, a white couple whose armed defense of their home during a racial injustice protest last month made national headlines. said. Joel Schwartz, who is now representing the couple, confirmed on Saturday that a search warrant was served, and that the gun Mark McCloskey was seen holding during last month's protest was seized. (Laurie Skrivan/St. Louis Post-Dispatch via AP) 


Read more: https://apnews.com/06da8173787de66efcdda67a61630342 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, badlatitude said:

Police execute search warrant at home of gun-toting couple

Source: AP

ST. LOUIS (AP) — Authorities executed a search warrant at the St. Louis mansion of a white couple whose armed defense of their home during a recent racial injustice protest drew widespread attention, their attorney confirmed Saturday. 

Mark and Patricia McCloskey, who are personal injury lawyers, were caught on video brandishing guns as demonstrators walked past their Renaissance palazzo-style home on June 28 while headed to protest outside of the mayor’s home nearby. The video showed Mark McCloskey, 61, wielding a long-barreled gun and Patricia McCloskey, 63 standing next to him waving a handgun. 

Joel Schwartz, the couple’s lawyer, said a search warrant was served Friday evening and that the gun Mark McCloskey was holding in the video was seized. Schwartz told The Associated Press that arrangements have been made to turn over to authorities on Saturday the gun that Patricia McCloskey had been holding, adding that her gun was inoperable at the time of the protest and still is. 

The couple has not been charged, and Schwartz said charges against them would be “absolutely, positively unmerited.” 

800.jpeg

FILE - In this June 28, 2020 file photo, armed homeowners Mark and Patricia McCloskey, standing in front their house along Portland Place confront protesters marching to St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson's house in the Central West End of St. Louis. Authorities executed a search warrant Friday evening, July 10, 2020, at the St. Louis mansion owned by the McCloskey's, a white couple whose armed defense of their home during a racial injustice protest last month made national headlines. said. Joel Schwartz, who is now representing the couple, confirmed on Saturday that a search warrant was served, and that the gun Mark McCloskey was seen holding during last month's protest was seized. (Laurie Skrivan/St. Louis Post-Dispatch via AP) 


Read more: https://apnews.com/06da8173787de66efcdda67a61630342 

Idiots. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

Local millionaires, influential, money, attorneys, money to blow, and a big ass house, innocent! your honor.

exterior-2_CMYK.jpg

PHOTO BY ALISE O'BRIEN

 

grand-staircase_CMYK.jpg

 

 

Not bad for a couple of ambulance chasers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

But they've been fighting for the underprivileged for decades!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Fuck, that is one nasty pair of human beings. Someone should close the school that let that pair become attorneys.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, badlatitude said:

Local millionaires, influential, money, attorneys, money to blow, and a big ass house, innocent! your honor.

exterior-2_CMYK.jpg

PHOTO BY ALISE O'BRIEN

 

grand-staircase_CMYK.jpg

 

 

You would think a couple of high powered lawyers would have better sense than to brandish guns on the street.  Wait until the looters get on the front step and then drag the bodies inside.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Burning Man said:

You would think a couple of high powered lawyers would have better sense than to brandish guns on the street.  Wait until the looters get on the front step and then drag the bodies inside.  

Wait until they kill someone with the right lawyer. That place would make a nice national headquarters for BLM.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In Minneapolis 150 police officers file for disability claiming PTSD. In New York 272 cops file for retirement since the protests and meanwhile in Anacostia south-east Washington following the shooting death of 11 year old Devon McNeal protesters demand more police in their community.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, badlatitude said:

Wait until they kill someone with the right lawyer. That place would make a nice national headquarters for BLM.

Hard to believe that the "idiots" would defend their private property against armed trespassers that refused to leave.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, jzk said:

Hard to believe that the "idiots" would defend their private property against armed trespassers that refused to leave.  

Anyone comes to my place with a gun and wants to steal shit, it's theirs, fill your boots mate. 

Anything else you need? Can I help?

Very un-American of me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Dog said:

In Minneapolis 150 police officers file for disability claiming PTSD. In New York 272 cops file for retirement since the protests and meanwhile in Anacostia south-east Washington following the shooting death of 11 year old Devon McNeal protesters demand more police in their community.

 

So you are looking for work, nothing doing and you left school early?

No problems, become a policeman.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, jzk said:

Hard to believe that the "idiots" would defend their private property against armed trespassers that refused to leave.  

Clearly you have swallowed the lies told by the McCloskey's.  They claimed the gate was smashed.  The attached video proves that to be a lie.  They claim they were eating dinner and did not appear with weapons until later, after they'd been threatened.  The attached video proves that to be a lie.  They claim they were threatened by protestors going to the Mayor's house.  The attached video does not support that allegation.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites